↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland
Published in
Archives of Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13690-016-0141-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cara Usher, Roisin Adams, Susanne Schmitz, Jennifer Kieran, Darina O’Flanagan, Joan O’Donnell, Kevin Connolly, Brenda Corcoran, Karina Butler, Michael Barry, Cathal Walsh

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of the current Irish programme of universal BCG vaccination of infants versus a programme which considered selectively vaccinating high risk infants using decision analytical modelling. The efficacy of the BCG vaccine was re-evaluated to inform a decision analytical model constructed to follow a birth cohort of vaccinated and unvaccinated infants over a 15 year time horizon. The number of life years gained (LYG) was the primary outcome measure and this was compared to the net cost of the vaccination strategies. In the base case analysis, the incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the universal strategy and selective strategy vs no vaccination were €204,373/LYG and €143,233/LYG respectively. When comparing the incremental difference in moving from the universal to the selective strategy, the selective strategy costs €1,055,692 less per 4.8 life years lost per birth cohort. One way sensitivity analyses highlighted that a move from the universal to the selective strategy was particularly sensitive to the estimate of vaccine efficacy against deaths, the cost of administering the vaccine and the multiplier used to apportion risk of contracting tuberculosis. Probabilistic analysis suggested that a move from a universal based strategy to a selective based strategy could be deemed cost effective (probability of cost effectiveness is 76.8 %). The results of the study support the protective effect of the BCG vaccine in infants and quantified the cost effectiveness of the current BCG vaccination strategy and the decremental difference in moving to a selective strategy. This analysis highlights that the additional protection offered by the universal vaccination strategy is small compared to that of the selective strategy. Consideration should therefore be given to the implementation of a selective vaccination strategy, and diverting resources to improve TB case management and control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Professor 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 31 49%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Mathematics 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 33 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,204,882
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Public Health
#428
of 1,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,689
of 370,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Public Health
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
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 370,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.