Value Frameworks for Vaccines: Which Dimensions Are Most Relevant?

Open Access Article
Value Frameworks for Vaccines: Which Dimensions Are Most Relevant?
by Jeroen Luyten, Roselinde Kessels, Corinne Vandermeulen and Philippe Beutels
Vaccines 2020, 8(4), 628; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines8040628 – 28 Oct 2020
Viewed by 197
Abstract
In addition to more narrow criteria such as safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, vaccines can also be evaluated based on broader criteria such as their economic impact, contribution to disease eradication objectives, caregiver aspects, financial protection offered, equity or social acceptability. We summarize a survey executed in a sample of the population (n = 1000) in Flanders, Belgium, in which we investigated support for using these broader criteria to evaluate vaccines for funding decisions. By means of both favourable and unfavourable framings of a hypothetical vaccine across 40 value dimensions, we find support for the view that people indeed consider a broad range of medical and socio-economic criteria relevant. Several of these are not incorporated in standard evaluation frameworks for vaccines. The different results we find for different framings highlight the importance of developing a consistent a priori value framework for vaccine evaluation, rather than evaluating vaccines on an ad hoc basis.

Vaccines — Open Access Journal
http://www.mdpi.com/journal/vaccines
(Accessed 31 Oct 2020)

 

Open Access Article
Value Frameworks for Vaccines: Which Dimensions Are Most Relevant?
by Jeroen Luyten, Roselinde Kessels, Corinne Vandermeulen and Philippe Beutels
Vaccines 2020, 8(4), 628; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines8040628 – 28 Oct 2020
Viewed by 197
Abstract
In addition to more narrow criteria such as safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, vaccines can also be evaluated based on broader criteria such as their economic impact, contribution to disease eradication objectives, caregiver aspects, financial protection offered, equity or social acceptability. We summarize a survey executed in a sample of the population (n = 1000) in Flanders, Belgium, in which we investigated support for using these broader criteria to evaluate vaccines for funding decisions. By means of both favourable and unfavourable framings of a hypothetical vaccine across 40 value dimensions, we find support for the view that people indeed consider a broad range of medical and socio-economic criteria relevant. Several of these are not incorporated in standard evaluation frameworks for vaccines. The different results we find for different framings highlight the importance of developing a consistent a priori value framework for vaccine evaluation, rather than evaluating vaccines on an ad hoc basis.