↓ Skip to main content

Simultaneously characterizing the comparative economics of routine female adolescent nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and assortativity of sexual mixing in Hong Kong Chinese: a…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Simultaneously characterizing the comparative economics of routine female adolescent nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and assortativity of sexual mixing in Hong Kong Chinese: a modeling analysis
Published in
BMC Medicine, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12916-018-1118-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Horace C. W. Choi, Mark Jit, Gabriel M. Leung, Kwok-Leung Tsui, Joseph T. Wu

Abstract

Although routine vaccination of females before sexual debut against human papillomavirus (HPV) has been found to be cost-effective around the world, its cost-benefit has rarely been examined. We evaluate both the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of routine female adolescent nonavalent HPV vaccination in Hong Kong to guide its policy, and by extension that of mainland China, on HPV vaccination. One major obstacle is the lack of data on assortativity of sexual mixing. Such difficulty could be overcome by inferring sexual mixing parameters from HPV epidemiologic data. We use an age-structured transmission model coupled with stochastic individual-based simulations to estimate the health and economic impact of routine nonavalent HPV vaccination for girls at age 12 on cervical cancer burden and consider vaccine uptake at 25%, 50%, and 75% with at least 20 years of vaccine protection. Bayesian inference was employed to parameterize the model using local data on HPV prevalence and cervical cancer incidence. We use the human capital approach in the cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and GDP per capita as the indicative willingness-to-pay threshold in the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Finally, we estimate the threshold vaccine cost (TVC), which is the maximum cost for fully vaccinating one girl at which routine female adolescent nonavalent HPV vaccination is cost-beneficial or cost-effective. As vaccine uptake increased, TVC decreased (i.e., economically more stringent) in the CBA but increased in the CEA. When vaccine uptake was 75% and the vaccine provided only 20 years of protection, the TVC was US$444 ($373-506) and $689 ($646-734) in the CBA and CEA, respectively, increasing by approximately 2-4% if vaccine protection was assumed lifelong. TVC is likely to be far higher when non-cervical diseases are included. The inferred sexual mixing parameters suggest that sexual mixing in Hong Kong is highly assortative by both age and sexual activity level. Routine HPV vaccination of 12-year-old females is highly likely to be cost-beneficial and cost-effective in Hong Kong. Inference of sexual mixing parameters from epidemiologic data of prevalent sexually transmitted diseases (i.e., HPV, chlamydia, etc.) is a potentially fruitful but largely untapped methodology for understanding sexual behaviors in the population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Researcher 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 35 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 38 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 January 2019.
All research outputs
#4,048,593
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,035
of 3,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,318
of 333,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#45
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.