Economic evaluations of vaccines in Canada: a scoping review

Abstract

BackgroundThis study aims to summarise and describe the evolution of published economic evaluations of vaccines in Canada, thereby outlining the current state of this expanding and meaningful research.MethodsUsing Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review framework we assembled relevant research from both academic and grey literature. Following abstract and full-text review we identified 60 articles to be included in the final analysis.ResultsWe found that since 1988 there has been a steady increase in the number of economic evaluations on vaccines in Canada. Many of these studies focus on the more recently licensed vaccines, such as influenza (16.7%), human papillomavirus (15.0%) and pneumococcal disease (15.0%). Since 2010 economic evaluations of vaccines have shown increased adherence to economic evaluation guidelines (OR = 4.6, CI 1.33, 18.7), suggesting there has been improvement in the consistency and transparency of these studies. However, there remains room for improvement, for instance, we found evidence that studies who stated a conflict of interest are more likely to assert the vaccine of interest was cost-effective (OR = 7.4; CI 1.04, 17.8). Furthermore, most reports use static models that do not consider herd immunity, and only a few evaluate vaccines post-implementation (ex-post) and traveller’s vaccinations.ConclusionResearchers should examine identified research gaps and continue to improve standardization and transparency when reporting to ensure economic evaluations of vaccines best meet the needs of policy-makers, other researchers and the public.