Pediatricians' preferences for infant meningococcal vaccination

Value in Health

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 67-77

  Poulos, Christine ^a   Johnson, Reed F ^a   Krishnarajah, Girishanthy ^b   Anonychuk, Andrea ^b   Misurski, Derek ^b  

^a RTI HEALTH SOLUTIONS   (United States)

^b GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United States)

Author keywords

conjoint analysis; discrete choice experiment; infant vaccine; meningococcal disease; preference

Indexed keywords

MENINGOCOCCUS VACCINE;

ADVISORY COMMITTEE; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; CHILD CARE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; IMMUNIZATION; INFANT DISEASE; MALE; MENINGOCOCCOSIS; PEDIATRICIAN; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VACCINATION; COST OF ILLNESS; ECONOMICS; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; INFANT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PEDIATRICS; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; COST OF ILLNESS; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNIZATION SCHEDULE; INFANT; MALE; MENINGOCOCCAL VACCINES; PEDIATRICS; PHYSICIAN'S ROLE;

EID: 84920816129     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.10.010     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention W. Atkinson, S. Wolfe, and J. Hamborsky Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases 12th ed. 2011 Public Health Foundation Washington, DC
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Active bacterial core surveillance report, Emerging Infections Program Network, Neisseria meningitidis, 2010. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/abcs/reports-findings/survreports/mening10.pdf. [Accessed May 10, 2012].
3. A.C. Cohn, J.R. MacNeil, and L.H. Harrison Changes in Neisseria meningitidis disease epidemiology in the United States, 1998-2007: implications for prevention of meningococcal disease Clin Infect Dis 50 2010 184 191
4. L. Rubin, A. Cohn, and J. MacNeil Infant meningococcal vaccination: Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendations and rationale MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 62 2013 52 54
5. G. Krause, C. Blackmore, and S. Wiersma Mass vaccination campaign following community outbreak of meningococcal disease Emerg Inf Dis 8 2002 1398 1408
6. M.T. Osterholm How to vaccinate 30,000 people in three days: realities of outbreak management Publ Health Rep 116 2001 74 78
7. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for use of quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY-D) among children aged 9 through 23 months at increased risk for invasive meningococcal disease. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2011;60:1391-2.
8. C.L. Trotter, and W.J. Edmunds Modelling cost effectiveness of meningococcal serogroup C conjugate vaccination campaign in England and Wales BMJ 324 2002 809 812
9. C.L. Trotter, and W.J. Edmunds Reassessing the cost-effectiveness of meningococcal serogroup C conjugate (MCC) vaccines using a transmission dynamic model Med Decis Making 26 2006 38 47
10. C.W. Shepard, I.R. Ortega-Sanchez, and R.D. Scott II Cost-effectiveness of conjugate meningococcal vaccination strategies in the United States Pediatrics 115 2005 1220 1232
11. D. Bishai, R. Brice, and I. Girod Conjoint analysis of French and German parents' willingness to pay for meningococcal vaccine Pharmacoeconomics 25 2007 143 154
12. D.S. Brown, F.R. Johnson, and C. Poulos Mothers preferences and willingness to pay for vaccinating daughters against human papillomavirus Vaccine 28 2010 1702 1708
13. C. Poulos, J.C. Yang, and C. Levin Mothers' preferences and willingness to pay for HPV vaccines in Vinh Long Province, Vietnam Soc Sci Med 73 2011 226 234
14. J. Cook, D. Whittington, and D.G. Canh Reliability of stated preferences for cholera and typhoid vaccines with time to think in Hue, Vietnam Econ Inq 45 2007 100e114
15. Marshall D, Bridges JFP, Hauber AB, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health - how are studies being designed and reported? An update on current practice in the published literature between 2005 and 2008. Patient 2010;3:249-56.
16. J.F.P. Bridges, A.B. Hauber, and D. Marshall Conjoint analysis applications in health - a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force Value Health 14 2011 403 413
17. T.J. Gan, D.A. Lubarsky, and E.M. Flood Patient preferences for acute pain treatment Br J Anaesth 92 2004 681 688
18. F.R. Johnson, S. Ozdemir, and C. Mansfield Crohn's disease patients' risk-benefit preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy Gastroenterology 133 2007 769 779
19. M. Ryan, E. McIntosh, and P. Shackley Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care Health Econ 7 1998 373 378
20. S. Bryan, M. Buxton, and R. Sheldon Preference measurement using conjoint methods: an empirical investigation of reliability Health Econ 7 1998 595 603
21. S. Özdemir, F.R. Johnson, and A.B. Hauber Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care J Health Econ 28 2008 894 901
22. C. Gidengil, T. Lieu, and K. Payne Parental and societal values for the risks and benefits of childhood combination vaccines Vaccine 30 2012 3445 3452
23. E.R. Stone, J.F. Yates, and A.M. Parker Risk communication: absolute versus relative expressions of low-probability risks Organ Behav Hum Dec Proc 60 1994 387 408
24. V.F. Reyna, and C.J. Brainerd Numeracy, ratio bias, and denominator neglect in judgments of risk and probability Learn Individ Differ 18 2008 89 107
25. P. Slovic Perception of risk Science 236 1987 280 285
26. E.A. Akl, A.D. Oxman, and J. Herrin Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011 Issue 3: Art. No.: CD006776. 10.1002/14651858.CD006776.pub2
27. J. Huber, and K. Zwerina The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs J Marketing Res 33 1996 307 317
28. B. Kanninen Optimal design for multinomial choice experiments J Marketing Res 39 2002 214 227
29. A. Dey Orthogonal Fractional Factorial Designs 1985 Halstead Press New York, NY
30. F.R. Johnson, E. Lancsar, and D. Marshall Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Question Force Value Health 16 2013 3 13
31. M. Bech, T. Kjaer, and J. Lauridsen Does the number of choice sets matter? Results from a web survey applying a discrete choice experiment Health Econ 20 2011 273 286
32. T. Maddala, K.A. Philips, and F.R. Johnson An experiment simplifying conjoint analysis designs for measuring preferences Health Econ 12 2003 1035 1047
33. J. Swait, and W. Adamowicz The influence of task complexity on consumer choice: a latent class model of decision strategy switching J Consumer Res 28 2003 135 148
34. D. McFadden Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior P. Zarembka, Frontiers in Economics 1974 Academic Press New York
35. K. Train Discrete Choice Methods With Simulation 2003 Cambridge University Press Cambridge, England
36. K. Train, and G. Sonnier Mixed logit with bounded distributions of correlated partworths R. Scarpa, A. Alberini, Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics 2005 Springer Dordrecht, The Netherlands
37. D.A. Hensher, J.M. Rose, and W.H. Greene Applied Choice Analysis 2005 Cambridge University Press Cambridge, England
38. F.R. Johnson, A.B. Hauber, and J. Zhang Quantifying patient preferences to inform benefit-risk evaluations A. Sashegyi, J. Felli, R. Noel, Benefit-Risk Assessment in Pharmaceutical Research and Development 2013 Routledge New York
39. J. Swait, and L. Louviere The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models J Marketing Res 30 1993 305 314
40. Nowak G. Stakeholder and public engagement: meningococcal vaccines and infants. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/acip/downloads/mtg-slides-oct11/05-PublicEngagement-Nowak.pdf. [Accessed April 9, 2012].
41. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) summary report February 24-25, 2010. 2010. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/min-archive/min-feb10.pdf. [Accessed February 5, 2013].
42. V. Reyna How people make decisions that involve risk: a dual-processes approach Curr Dir Psychologl Sci 13 2004 60 66
43. J.F.P. Bridges, E.T. Kinter, and L. Kidane Things are looking up since we started listening to patients Patient 1 2008 273 282
44. E.W. De Bekker-Grob, M. Ryan, and K. Gerard Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature Health Econ 21 2012 145 172