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.
Keywords: health-related quality of life; infectious diseases; literature review; pediatric; vaccine preventable.
Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.