Simplified Mathematical Modeling of Uncertainty: Cost-Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in Spain

[EN] When exceptional situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic arise and reliable data is not available at decision-making times, estimation using mathematical models can provide a reasonable reckoning for health planning. We present a simplified model (static but with two-time references) for estimating the cost-effectiveness of the Covid-19 vaccine. A simplified model provides quick assessment of the upper bound of cost-effectiveness, as we illustrated with data from Spain, and allows for easy comparisons between countries. It may also provide useful comparisons among different vaccines at the marketplace, from the perspective of the buyer. From analysis of this information, key epidemiological figures, and costs of the disease for Spain have been estimated, based on mortality. The fatality value is a robust data that can alternatively be obtained from death registers, funeral homes, cemeteries, and crematoria. Our model estimates the cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to be 5,132 € (4,926 ¿ 5,276) as of 17 February 2021, based on the following assumptions/inputs: an estimated cost of 30 euros per dose (plus transport, storing, and administration), two doses per person, efficacy of 70% and coverage of 70% of the population. Even considering the possibility of some bias, this simplified model provides confirmation that vaccination against COVID-19 is highly cost-effective.Marco-Franco, JE.; Pita-Barros, P.; González-De Julián, S.; Sabat, I.; Vivas-Consuelo, D. (2021). Simplified Mathematical Modeling of Uncertainty: Cost-Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in Spain. Mathematics. 9(5):1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/math90505661159

Jumping the Queue:Willingness to Pay for Faster Access to COVID-19 Vaccines in Seven European Countries

Introduction: Given the initial shortage of vaccines to protect against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many countries set up priority lists, implying that large parts of the population had to wait. We therefore elicited the willingness to pay (WTP) for access to two hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: Respondents were asked how much they would be willing to pay to get an immediate COVID-19 vaccination rather than waiting for one through the public system. We report data collected in January/February 2021 from the European COVID Survey (ECOS) comprising representative samples of the population in Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, the Netherlands, and the UK (N = 7068). Results: In total, 73% (68.5%) of respondents were willing to pay for immediate access to a 100% (60%) effective vaccine, ranging from 66.4% (59.4%) in the Netherlands to 83.3% (81.1%) in Portugal. We found a mean WTP of 54.36 euros (median 37 euros) for immediate access to the 100% effective COVID-19 vaccine and 43.83 euros (median 31 euros) for the 60% effective vaccine. The vaccines’ effectiveness, respondents’ age, country of residence, income, health state and well-being were significant determinants of WTP. Willingness to be vaccinated (WTV) was also strongly associated with WTP, with lower WTV being associated with lower WTP. A higher perceived risk of infection, higher health risk, more trust in the safety of vaccines, and higher expected waiting time for the free vaccination were all associated with a higher WTP. Conclusion: We find that most respondents would have been willing to pay for faster access to COVID vaccines (jumping the queue), suggesting welfare gains from quicker access to these vaccines. This is an important result in light of potential future outbreaks and vaccines.</p

Prevalence and determinants of probable depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic in seven countries:Longitudinal evidence from the European COvid Survey (ECOS)

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to present data on the prevalence of probable depression and anxiety and to determine their correlates during the COVID-19 pandemic in seven European countries using a longitudinal approach. METHODS: Longitudinal data (wave 4 in November 2020: n = 7,115; wave 5 in January 2021: n = 7,068; wave 6 in April 2021: n = 7,204) were taken from the European COvid Survey (ECOS), a representative sample of non-institutionalized inhabitants from Germany, United Kingdom, Denmark, Netherlands, France, Portugal and Italy aged 18+. Probable depression and anxiety were quantified using the established and validated PHQ-4 (2-item depression scale, PHQ-2 / 2-item anxiety scale, GAD-2). RESULTS: In wave 4 (wave 5; wave 6), 26.6% (25.5%; 23.8%) of all respondents had probable depression and 25.7% (23.6%; 22.1%) had probable anxiety. Prevalence rates for probable depression and probable anxiety differed significantly between countries. Among all countries and waves, particularly high prevalence rates were found among individuals aged 18 to 29 years. Longitudinal analysis showed that the likelihood of probable depression was positively associated with increasing age, great income difficulties and lower health-related quality of life. The likelihood of probable anxiety was positively associated with income difficulties, and lower health-related quality of life. LIMITATIONS: Screening tool was used to quantify the outcomes. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of probable depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic in European countries was highlighted. Moreover, determining the factors associated with probable depression or anxiety (e.g., income difficulties, worse health-related quality of life) may assist in identifying individuals at increased risk

Vaccine hesitancy comes in waves:Longitudinal evidence on willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 from seven European countries

Funding Information: Authors’ contributions: All authors contributed to the manuscript. IS, TS and JS conceptualized the idea and developed the methodology of the study. IS conducted the formal analysis, investigation and data visualizations and wrote the original draft. JE, JS, TS, PPB, WB, SNB and AT provided critical revisions and validation. IS and SNB equally contributed to the design and implementation of the survey with expertise and feedback from PPB, WB, JE, AT, JS and TS. Tom Stargardt and Jonas Schreyögg equally contributed to the study and should be regarded as Senior authors. Iryna Sabat, Jonas Schreyögg, Tom Stargardt, had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Funding: This project received funding from the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme of the European Union through the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Grant Agreement No. 721402 coordinated by the University of Hamburg in Germany and was further funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) under grant number 466310982. The work was also supported by funding under the Excellence Strategy by the German federal and state governments, as well as by the University of Hamburg, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Bocconi University and Nova School of Business& Economics Lisbon – Chair BPI | “Fundacão La Caixa” on Health Economics. Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The Funding organisations had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors have completed the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work, no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. Disclaimer: Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the affiliated institutions. Additional Contributions: We would like to thank our colleagues in the ECOS consortium for their cooperation in this project. We especially want to thank our translators Joana Pestana, Elisabetta Oliveri, Maarten Husen, Julien Bergeot, Lasse Falk, who translated the questionnaire into their native languages. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The AuthorsAim: This paper investigates the prevalence and determinants of three main states of people's willingness to be vaccinated (WTBV) against COVID-19 – willing, unwilling and hesitant – and the occurrence and predictors of shifts between these states over time. Understanding the dynamics of vaccine intentions is crucial for developing targeted campaigns to increase uptake and emergency response preparedness. Study design: A panel survey consisting of 9 quarterly waves of data collected between April 2020 and January 2022. Baseline data included 24 952 adults from Germany, UK, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Portugal, and Italy recruited from online panels to construct census-matched nationally representative samples. Methods and measures: Self-reported COVID-19 vaccine intention was the main outcome. Multinomial logit random effects models were used to analyze the relationships of interest. All results reported as relative risk ratios (RRR). Results: Hesitancy to get vaccinated was the most unstable vaccine intention, with on average 42% of ever hesitant respondents remaining in this state through future waves, followed by the ‘unwilling’ (53%) and ‘willing (82%). Following COVID-19 news, trust in information from the government, GPs and the WHO, risk preferences, risk perceptions, and confidence in vaccines (or lack thereof) predicted vaccination intention reversals. Risk preferences acted both as an impediment and as a facilitator for the vaccine uptake depending on the initial vaccine intention. Conclusions and relevance: This study revealed the dynamic nature of COVID-19 vaccine intentions and its predictors in 7 European countries. The findings provide insights to policymakers for designing more effective communication strategies, particularly targeted at hesitant and unwilling to vaccinate population groups, to increase vaccine uptake for future public health emergencies.publishersversionpublishe

Vaccine hesitancy comes in waves:Longitudinal evidence on willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 from seven European countries

Aim: This paper investigates the prevalence and determinants of three main states of people's willingness to be vaccinated (WTBV) against COVID-19 – willing, unwilling and hesitant – and the occurrence and predictors of shifts between these states over time. Understanding the dynamics of vaccine intentions is crucial for developing targeted campaigns to increase uptake and emergency response preparedness. Study design: A panel survey consisting of 9 quarterly waves of data collected between April 2020 and January 2022. Baseline data included 24 952 adults from Germany, UK, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Portugal, and Italy recruited from online panels to construct census-matched nationally representative samples. Methods and measures: Self-reported COVID-19 vaccine intention was the main outcome. Multinomial logit random effects models were used to analyze the relationships of interest. All results reported as relative risk ratios (RRR). Results: Hesitancy to get vaccinated was the most unstable vaccine intention, with on average 42% of ever hesitant respondents remaining in this state through future waves, followed by the ‘unwilling’ (53%) and ‘willing (82%). Following COVID-19 news, trust in information from the government, GPs and the WHO, risk preferences, risk perceptions, and confidence in vaccines (or lack thereof) predicted vaccination intention reversals. Risk preferences acted both as an impediment and as a facilitator for the vaccine uptake depending on the initial vaccine intention. Conclusions and relevance: This study revealed the dynamic nature of COVID-19 vaccine intentions and its predictors in 7 European countries. The findings provide insights to policymakers for designing more effective communication strategies, particularly targeted at hesitant and unwilling to vaccinate population groups, to increase vaccine uptake for future public health emergencies.</p

Braving the waves:exploring capability well-being patterns in seven European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic considerably impacted the lives of European citizens. This study aims to provide a nuanced picture of well-being patterns during the pandemic across Europe with a special focus on relevant socio-economic sub-groups. This observational study uses data from a repeated, cross-sectional, representative population survey with nine waves of data from seven European countries from April 2020 to January 2022. The analysis sample contains a total of 25,062 individuals providing 64,303 observations. Well-being is measured using the ICECAP-A, a multi-dimensional instrument for approximating capability well-being. Average levels of ICECAP-A index values and sub-dimension scores were calculated across waves, countries, and relevant sub-groups. In a fixed effects regression framework, associations of capability well-being with COVID-19 incidence, mortality, and the stringency of the imposed lockdown measures were estimated. Denmark, the Netherlands, and France experienced a U-shaped pattern in well-being (lowest point in winter 2020/21), while well-being in the UK, Germany, Portugal, and Italy followed an M-shape, with increases after April 2020, a drop in winter 2020, a recovery in the summer of 2021, and a decline in winter 2021. However, observed average well-being reductions were generally small. The largest declines were found in the well-being dimensions attachment and enjoyment and among individuals with a younger age, a financially unstable situation, and lower health. COVID-19 mortality was consistently negatively associated with capability well-being and its sub-dimensions, while stringency and incidence rate were generally not significantly associated with well-being. Further investigation is needed to understand underlying mechanisms of presented patterns.</p

a descriptive study on familiarity with, adherence to and trust in the WHO preventive measures

Background Risk communication is a key component of public health interventions during an outbreak. As the coronavirus pandemic unfolded in late 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) was at the forefront in the development of risk communication strategies. The WHO introduced a range of activities with the purpose of enabling the public to avail verified and timely information on COVID-19 prevention behaviors. Given the various WHO activities to protect the public health during COVID-19, it is important to investigate the extent of familiarity and uptake of the WHO recommendations among the public during the first wave of the pandemic. Methods To do this, we conducted a large-scale Pan-European survey covering around 7500 individuals that are representative of populations from seven European countries, collected online during April 2-April 15, 2020. We use descriptive statistics including proportions and correlations and graphical representations such as bar charts to analyze and display the data. Results Our findings suggest that information from the WHO in the context of COVID-19 is well trusted and acted upon by the public. Overall familiarity and adherence were quite high in most countries. Adherence was higher for social distancing recommendations compared to hygiene measures. Familiarity and adherence were higher among older, female, and highly educated respondents. However, country level heterogeneities were observed in the level of trust in information from the WHO, with countries severely affected by the pandemic reporting lower levels of trust. Conclusion Our findings call for efforts from health authorities to get regular feedback from the public on their familiarity and compliance with recommendations for preventive measures at all stages of the pandemic, to further develop and adapt risk communication as the pandemic evolves.publishersversionpublishe

Psychometric evaluation of the Mental Health Quality of Life (MHQoL) instrument in seven European countries

Introduction: To make efficient use of available resources, decision-makers in healthcare may assess the costs and (health) benefits of health interventions. For interventions aimed at improving mental health capturing the full health benefits is an important challenge. The Mental Health Quality of Life (MHQoL) instrument was recently developed to meet this challenge. Evaluating the pyschometric properties of this instrument in different contexts remains important. Methods: A psychometric evaluation of the MHQoL was performed using existing international, cross-sectional data with 7155 respondents from seven European countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, The Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom). Reliability was examined by calculating Cronbach’s alpha, a measure of internal consistency of the seven MHQoL dimensions, and by examining the association of the MHQoL sum scores with the MHQoL-VAS scores. Construct validity was examined by calculating Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients between the MHQoL sum scores and EQ-5D index scores, EQ-VAS scores, EQ-5D anxiety/depression dimension scores, ICECAP-A index scores and PHQ-4 sum scores. Results: The MHQoL was found to have good internal consistency for all seven countries. The MHQoL sum score and the MHQoL-VAS had a high correlation. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients were moderate to very high for all outcomes. Conclusion: Our results, based on data gathered in seven European countries, suggest that the MHQoL shows favourable psychometrical characteristics. While further validation remains important, the MHQoL may be a useful instrument in measuring mental health-related quality of life in the Western European context

Psychometric evaluation of the Mental Health Quality of Life (MHQoL) instrument in seven European countries

INTRODUCTION: To make efficient use of available resources, decision-makers in healthcare may assess the costs and (health) benefits of health interventions. For interventions aimed at improving mental health capturing the full health benefits is an important challenge. The Mental Health Quality of Life (MHQoL) instrument was recently developed to meet this challenge. Evaluating the pyschometric properties of this instrument in different contexts remains important. METHODS: A psychometric evaluation of the MHQoL was performed using existing international, cross-sectional data with 7155 respondents from seven European countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, The Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom). Reliability was examined by calculating Cronbach's alpha, a measure of internal consistency of the seven MHQoL dimensions, and by examining the association of the MHQoL sum scores with the MHQoL-VAS scores. Construct validity was examined by calculating Spearman's rank correlation coefficients between the MHQoL sum scores and EQ-5D index scores, EQ-VAS scores, EQ-5D anxiety/depression dimension scores, ICECAP-A index scores and PHQ-4 sum scores. RESULTS: The MHQoL was found to have good internal consistency for all seven countries. The MHQoL sum score and the MHQoL-VAS had a high correlation. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were moderate to very high for all outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our results, based on data gathered in seven European countries, suggest that the MHQoL shows favourable psychometrical characteristics. While further validation remains important, the MHQoL may be a useful instrument in measuring mental health-related quality of life in the Western European context

Depression and anxiety in later COVID-19 waves across Europe: New evidence from the European COvid Survey (ECOS)

We aimed to investigate the prevalence of probable depression and anxiety and their correlates during later stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in eight European countries. Longitudinal data (wave 7 in June/July 2021: n=8,032; wave 8 in September 2021: n=8,250; wave 9 in December 2021/January 2022: n=8,319) were used from the European COvid Survey – a representative sample of community-dwelling adults from several European countries (Germany, United Kingdom, Denmark, Netherlands, France, Portugal, Italy and Spain). In wave 7 (wave 8; wave 9), 23.8% (22.0%; 24.3%) of all respondents had probable depression and 22.6% (22.1%; 23.7%) had probable anxiety. These prevalence rates substantially differed between the European countries. Regressions showed that emerging difficulties with the income were associated with both increases in depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms. An increase in one's own perceived risk of getting infected with the SARS-CoV-2, the birth of a child and an increase in the Covid-19 stringency index were associated with increases in depressive symptoms. The significance of probable depression and anxiety during later stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in eight European countries was highlighted. Avoiding income difficulties may also contribute to mental health