Skip to main content

Table 6 Overview of included studies – base case (sensitivity analyses) presented

From: Systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses for combinations of prevention strategies against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection: a general trend

 

Kulasingam 2003 [27]

Sanders 2003 [28]

Goldie 2004 [29]

Taira 2004 [32]

Kulasingam 2007 [39]

Country

US

US

US

US

Australia

Modelling approach

Markov Model

Markov Model

Markov Model

Deterministic transmission Model

Markov Model

Disease included

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,SIL, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV types (High Risk/ Low Risk)

yes/yes

16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59,68/20,22

16,18,non 16–18/yes

16,18/-

16,18,non 16–18/yes

Target population

12 F to 85 F

12 F

13 F to ≈ 17 F

12 F to 50 F

12 F to 85 F

Time horizon

12 to 85

12 to Lifetime

12 to Lifetime

12 to Lifetime

12 to 85

Discount rates

3%

3% (0–5%)

3%

2% (0–5%)

5% (3–5%)

Perspective

Societal

Societal

Societal

Societal

Societal

 

Goldhaber-Fiebert 2008 [33]

Kim 2008 [31]

Coupe, de Melker 2009 [35]

Coupe, van Ginkel 2009 [36]

Kim 2009 [30]

Country

US

US

Netherlands

Netherlands

US

Modelling approach

Individual-based model

Dynamic Model

Markov Model

Markov Model

Hybrid model (transmission model + disease model)

Disease included

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

CIN, CC, other HPV-related disease

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

CIN, CC, other HPV-related diseases

HPV type (High Risk/Low Risk)

16,18,non 16–18/yes

16,18/-

16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59,68/-

16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56, 58,59,66,68/-

16,18/-

Target population

9 F to Lifetime

12 F

12 F

12 F

12 F + M

Time horizon

9 to Lifetime

12 to Lifetime

12 to Lifetime

12 to Lifetime

12 to Lifetime

Discount rates

3%

3%

4% (Costs) 1.5% (Health)

4% (Costs) 1.5% (Health)

3%

Perspective

Societal

Societal

Societal

Societal

Societal

 

Kim, Ortendahl 2009 [34]

Accetta 2010 [38]

Diaz 2010 [43]

Demarteau 2011 [41]

Burger 2012 [42]

Country

US

Italy

Spain

France

Norway

Modelling approach

Individual-based Model

Markov Model

Micro-simulation model

Markov Model

Simulation model

Disease included

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV type (High Risk/Low Risk)

16,18/-

16,18,non 16–18/yes

16,18,non 16–18/yes

-

16,18,non 16–18/yes

Target population

35–45 F

F

11–14 F

12 F

F

Time horizon

35–45 to Lifetime

11 to Lifetime

11 to lifetime

12 to lifetime

Lifetime

Discount rates

3%

3%

3%

3% (Costs) 1.5% (Health) (0–5%)

4%

Perspective

Societal

Societal

Societal

Societal

Societal

 

Coupe 2012 [37]

Tully 2012 [40]

Berkhof 2013 [44]

 

Country

Netherlands

Canada

Slovenia, Poland

 

Modelling approach

Individual-based model

Transmission model

Individual-based model

 

Disease included

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

HPV,

CIN1,2–3, CC

 

HPV type (High Risk/Low Risk)

16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56, 58,59,66,68/-

16,18,non 16–18/-

16,18,−/−

 

Target population

10 F

18 F

12 F

 

Time horizon

10 to Lifetime

80 years

Not clear

 

Discount rates

4% (Costs) 1.5% (Health)

(No-3%)

3%

3%

 

Perspective*

Societal

Societal

Societal

 
  1. *Societal perspective – costs and QALYs are calculated based on health forgone as a result of costs falling on the healthcare budget and displacing other healthcare activities