Data extraction category | Specific information to extract |
---|---|
A. Model characteristics | |
Model | Author(s), year of publication, model design (static model, dynamic model, or hybrid model) |
Perspective | Providers, patients, or societal perspective |
Benefits (QALY, DALY, YLS) | Measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), disability-adjusted life years (DALY), years of life saved (YLS) |
B. Base-case assumptions | |
Current routine practice efficacy | Efficacy of the current screening practice (cytology-based screening, DNA screening, or visual inspection with acetic acid) used as the comparator |
Screening age/screening interval | Age at which women commence screening and screening interval |
Vaccine coverage in target groups | Current HPV vaccination coverage |
Age for vaccination | Age group eligible to receive HPV vaccination |
Estimated effective coverage | HPV vaccination coverage and the rationale for the assumption |
Screening compliance | Estimate used for comparison with current practice |
Sensitivity/specificity of the screening | Sensitivity/specificity estimate for the screening methods |
Duration of vaccine protection | Total length of time HPV vaccination is assumed to protect the recipient from acquiring infection |
Cost of vaccine per three doses (and booster if included) | Market cost or subsidized cost. Other cost associated with vaccination, e.g., freight, storage, and program cost. School-based-delivery cost or health-facility-based delivery cost |
Discounting rate | Discounting rate used to adjust for time preference for money |
C. Results | |
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) | The most cost-effective protocol compared with the second best protocol |
Year based for currency value | The year which the analysis was conducted |
Adjusted ICER (to 2014) | Adjusted ICER to reflect 2014 value |
Data sources | |
Source(s) | Data source used to derive estimates of HPV-related epidemiologic outcomes, e.g., HPV (type-specific) prevalence, cervical cancer incidence, probability of HPV transmission given a sexual partnership, and crude mortality from cervical cancer. |
D. Sensitivity and uncertainty | |
Sensitivity analysis | Parameters that had the highest effect on model-based recommendation. |
Uncertainty analysis | The contribution of individual parameters on overall uncertainty (when reported). |
E. Miscellaneous | |
Funding and conflict of interest | Funding for the study and the role of the funder in the study. Possible conflict of interest declared by the author |
Factors not taken into account | How did model acknowledge and account for special challenges of the LMIC? Choice of modelling herd immunity |