Weekly number of dengue cases with high efficacy sustained vector control and/or a highly targeted immunization strategy, best estimates.

<p>Weekly number of dengue cases with high efficacy sustained vector control and/or a highly targeted immunization strategy, best estimates.</p

Weekly number of dengue cases with medium or high efficacy sustained vector control technologies but no immunization, best estimates.

<p>Weekly number of dengue cases with medium or high efficacy sustained vector control technologies but no immunization, best estimates.</p

Best estimates of costs, DALYs, Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER), medium efficacy vector control over 15 years.

<p>Best estimates of costs, DALYs, Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER), medium efficacy vector control over 15 years.</p

Average annual DALYs (in thousands) implied by the model (best and 95% uncertainty interval).

<p>Average annual DALYs (in thousands) implied by the model (best and 95% uncertainty interval).</p

Probability of being most cost-effective at any given threshold, considering high-efficacy sustained vector control and a highly targeted, low-cost immunization strategy.

<p>The solid lines are cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) representing the probability that an intervention is cost-effective at a given threshold; the (vertical) dashed line indicates the probability that an intervention is cost-effective at a threshold equal to GDP per capita; the dotted line represents the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF) which represents the probability that the most cost-effective option is cost-effective at a given threshold.</p

Best estimates of costs, DALYs, Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER), high efficacy vector control over 15 years.

<p>Best estimates of costs, DALYs, Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER), high efficacy vector control over 15 years.</p

Probability of being most cost-effective at any given threshold, considering medium-efficacy sustained vector control and a highly targeted, low-cost immunization strategy.

<p>The solid lines are cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) representing the probability that an intervention is cost-effective at a given threshold; the (vertical) dashed line indicates the probability that an intervention is cost-effective at a threshold equal to GDP per capita; the dotted line represents the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF) which represents the probability that the most cost-effective option is cost-effective at a given threshold.</p

Additional intervention model parameters, with distributions and sources.

<p>Additional intervention model parameters, with distributions and sources.</p

Average annual cost and affordability, 2013 US$ millions.

<p>Average annual cost and affordability, 2013 US$ millions.</p

Weekly number of dengue cases with no vector control or immunization (case management only), our base model compared to published estimates of apparent cases, best estimates and 95% UIs.

<p>The black line and grey bands represent the best estimates and uncertainty intervals for the number of dengue cases as projected by our base model; the dotted black line represents the number of dengue cases in a single, randomly selected iteration of the model; the blue bands represent uncertainty intervals for apparent cases, as published by Bhatt et al. (2013)</p