Use of Utility and Disability Weights in Economic Evaluation of Pediatric Vaccines.

OBJECTIVE: To describe how utility weights and disability weights have been used in the context of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs)-based cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of pediatric vaccines for infectious diseases and assess the comparability between weights. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of CEAs of pediatric vaccines for 16 infectious diseases, published between January 2013 and December 2020 and using QALYs or DALYs as outcome measure. Data on values and sources of weights for the estimation of QALYs and DALYs were extracted from studies and compared across similar health states. Reporting was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. RESULTS: Out of 2154 articles identified, 216 CEAs met our inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, 157 used utility weights and 59 used disability weights in their valuation of health states. In QALY studies, the source, background, who's preferences (adults'/children's) were applied and adjustments made to utility weights were poorly reported. In DALY studies, the Global Burden of Disease study was most often referenced. Valuation weights for similar health states varied within QALY studies and between DALY and QALY studies, but no systematic differences were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified considerable gaps in the way valuation weights are used and reported on in CEA. The nonstandardized use of weights may lead to different conclusions about cost-effectiveness of vaccines and policy decisions.

Testing behaviour and positivity for SARS-CoV-2 infection: insights from web-based participatory surveillance in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify populations at a high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection but who are less likely to present for testing, by determining which sociodemographic and household factors are associated with a lower propensity to be tested and, if tested, with a higher risk of a positive test result. DESIGN AND SETTING: Internet-based participatory surveillance data from the general population of the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Weekly survey data collected over a 5-month period (17 November 2020 to 18 April 2021) from a total of 12 026 participants who had contributed at least 2 weekly surveys was analysed. METHODS: Multivariable analyses using generalised estimating equations for binomial outcomes were conducted to estimate the adjusted ORs of testing and of test positivity associated with participant and household characteristics. RESULTS: Male sex (adjusted OR for testing (ORt): 0.92; adjusted OR for positivity (ORp): 1.30, age groups<20 (ORt: 0.89; ORp: 1.27), 50-64 years (ORt: 0.94; ORp: 1.06) and 65+ years (ORt: 0.78; ORp: 1.24), diabetics (ORt: 0.97; ORp: 1.06) and sales/administrative employees (ORt: 0.93; ORp: 1.90) were distinguished as lower test propensity/higher test positivity factors. CONCLUSIONS: The factors identified using this approach can help identify potential target groups for improving communication and encouraging testing among those with symptoms, and thus increase the effectiveness of testing, which is essential for the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and for public health strategies in the longer term.