Citerank: (11) 679761Caroline ColijnDr. Caroline Colijn works at the interface of mathematics, evolution, infection and public health, and leads the MAGPIE research group. She joined SFU's Mathematics Department in 2018 as a Canada 150 Research Chair in Mathematics for Infection, Evolution and Public Health. She has broad interests in applications of mathematics to questions in evolution and public health, and was a founding member of Imperial College London's Centre for the Mathematics of Precision Healthcare.10019D3ABAB, 679770Christopher McCabeDr. Christopher McCabe is the CEO and Executive Director of the Institute of Health Economics (IHE).10019D3ABAB, 679862Paul TupperProfessor in the Department of Mathematics at Simon Fraser University.10019D3ABAB, 685420Hospitals16289D5D4, 686720Erin KirwinErin Kirwin (she/her) is a Health Economist at the Institute of Health Economics (IHE) in Alberta, Canada. She holds a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Economics and International Development Studies from McGill University and a Master of Arts in Economics from the University of Alberta. Prior to joining the IHE, Erin was the Manager of Advanced Analytics at Alberta Health. Erin is a PhD candidate at the University of Manchester.10019D3ABAB, 701020CANMOD – PublicationsPublications by CANMOD Members144B5ACA0, 704041Vaccination859FDEF6, 704045Covid-19859FDEF6, 714608Charting a FutureCharting a Future for Emerging Infectious Disease Modelling in Canada – April 2023 [1] 2794CAE1, 715454Workforce impact859FDEF6, 728545Long COVIDPost-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC).859FDEF6

[PLOS Global Public Health, 13 October 2021]

In vaccination campaigns against COVID-19, many jurisdictions are using age-based rollout strategies, reflecting the much higher risk of severe outcomes of infection in older groups. In the wake of growing evidence that approved vaccines are effective at preventing not only adverse outcomes, but also infection, we show that such strategies are less effective than strategies that prioritize essential workers. This conclusion holds across numerous outcomes, including cases, hospitalizations, Long COVID (cases with symptoms lasting longer than 28 days), deaths and net monetary benefit. Our analysis holds in regions where the vaccine supply is limited, and rollout is prolonged for several months. In such a setting with a population of 5M, we estimate that vaccinating essential workers sooner prevents over 200,000 infections, over 600 deaths, and produces a net monetary benefit of over $500M.

[Value in Health, March 2024]

Objectives: This study aimed to assess whether recently proposed alternatives to the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), intended to address concerns about discrimination, are suitable for informing resource allocation decisions.

Methods: We consider 2 alternatives to the QALY: the health years in total (HYT), recently proposed by Basu et al, and the equal value of life-years gained (evLYG), currently used by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. For completeness we also consider unweighted life-years (LYs). Using a hypothetical example comparing 3 mutually exclusive treatment options, we consider how calculations are performed under each approach and whether the resulting rankings are logically consistent. We also explore some further challenges that arise from the unique properties of the HYT approach.

Results: The HYT and evLYG approaches can result in logical inconsistencies that do not arise under the QALY or LY approaches. HYT can violate the independence of irrelevant alternatives axiom, whereas the evLYG can produce an unstable ranking of treatment options. HYT have additional issues, including an implausible assumption that the utilities associated with health-related quality of life and LYs are “separable,” and a consideration of “counterfactual” health-related quality of life for patients who are dead.

Conclusions: The HYT and evLYG approaches can result in logically inconsistent decisions. We recommend that decision makers avoid these approaches and that the logical consistency of any approaches proposed in future be thoroughly explored before considering their use in practice.

[Frontiers in Public Health, 24 July 2024]

Introduction: Successful vaccine promotion communication strategies require knowing how eligible recipients will respond to the opportunity to get vaccinated. Two main classes of recipients are myopic rationalists, those who receive a dose of vaccine only if it maximizes their own instant benefit and if so, do it as soon as possible, and success-based learners, those who learn from others that they perceive to be most successful.

Methods: A recent study models these two decision-making types, and estimates the population proportion of myopic rationalists in each U.S. state. In this report, we fit a similar model to data on COVID-19 vaccine uptake across the Canadian provinces and territories.

Results: We estimated that 64% of Canadians behaved as myopic rationalists in taking the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, compared to an estimated 47% in the United States. Among the provinces, the lowest proportion of myopic rationalists was 0.51 in Saskatchewan, while the highest was 0.74 in Prince Edward Island. The correlation analysis suggested a positive correlation between the proportion of myopic rationalists and the average age across the Canadian provinces (Pearson-r = 0.71).

Discussion: Canadian health management may benefit from these results in tailoring the vaccine promotion communication strategies.

[Vaccine, 15 February 2025]

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to cause serious health consequences globally. Policy makers now assess cost effectiveness (CE) when evaluating COVID-19 vaccines. A targeted literature review was performed to examine recent CE evidence for COVID-19 vaccines, as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transitions from pandemic to endemic, to identify best practices. Data were from large EU countries (UK, Spain, Germany, France, and Italy), US, Canada, and Australia. Nine CE studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies evaluated booster vaccination, and mainly considered mRNA vaccines. CE studies reported that COVID-19 vaccines provided health benefits and were cost-effective or showed cost-savings. Benefits were more pronounced in older and high-risk populations based on higher rates of COVID-19 hospitalization and death. CE findings were most sensitive to estimates of incidence of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmissibility, vaccine effectiveness, waning/duration of vaccine protection, and hospitalization costs. Most data inputs were sourced from real-world evidence (RWE). Lack of inclusion of some parameters, such as transmission modeling, productivity losses, and the impact of long COVID may undervalue COVID-19 vaccines. As SARS-CoV-2 evolves and COVID-19 vaccines are updated, continuous generation of RWE is needed to demonstrate the CE of COVID-19 vaccines in an ongoing manner.