Additional file 1 of The impact of home-based management of malaria on clinical outcomes in sub-Saharan African populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Additional file 1: Figure S1. Pooled effect estimates of home management of malaria with artesunate–amodiaquine compared to home management of malaria with other antimalarial drug combinations on risk of experiencing adverse drug events. Figure S2. Pooled effect estimates of home-based intermittent preventive treatment compared with home-based management of malaria on risk of developing severe malaria. Figure S3. Pooled effect estimates of home management of malaria with Argemone mexicana decoction compared to home management of malaria with artesunate–amodiaquine on clinical outcomes. Figure S4. Assessment of risk of bias in observational studies based on ROBINS-I tool. Figure S5. Assessment of risk of bias in individually randomised controlled trials based on RoB 2.0 tool. Figure S6. Assessment of risk of bias in cluster-randomised controlled trials based on RoB 2.0 CRT tool. Table S1. Summary of included studies. Table S2. Sensitivity and specificity of malaria diagnosis. Table S3. Antimalarial treatment following implementation of home-based interventions in communities. Table S4. Cost-effectiveness findings from relevant individual studies. Supplementary Table S5. Safety findings from individual studies

Economic evaluations of <i>Haemophilus influenzae</i> type b (Hib) vaccine: a systematic review

<p><b>Aims:</b> The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the use of <i>Haemophilus influenzae</i> type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines, but China and Thailand have not used Hib vaccination in their national immunization programs. This systematic review aimed to update published economic evaluations of Hib vaccinations and to determine factors that potentially affected their cost-effectiveness.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> Searches were performed from the inception until December 2015 using 13 databases: CAB direct; CEA registry; EconLit; EMBASE; E-library; NHSEED; PAHO; POPLINE; PubMed; Redalyc project; RePEc; SciELO; and WHOLIS. Reference lists of relevant studies and grey literature were also searched. Full economic evaluations of Hib vaccination with results of costs and outcomes were included. The WHO checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Data from eligible studies were extracted using a standardized data collection form.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Out of 830 articles, 27 were included. Almost half of the studies (12/27) were conducted in high-income countries. Twelve studies (12/27) investigated the Hib vaccine as an addition to the existing vaccination program. Most studies (17/27) examined a 3-dose schedule of Hib vaccine. Nineteen studies (19/27) reported the model used, where all were decision tree models. Most of the studies (23/27) demonstrated an economic value of Hib vaccination programs, key influential parameters being incidence rates of Hib disease and vaccine price.</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> Hib vaccination programs are mostly found to be cost-effective across geographic regions and country income levels, and Hib vaccination is recommended for inclusion into all national immunization programs. The findings are expected to support policy-makers for making decisions on allocating limited resources of the Hib vaccination program effectively.</p