However this global pattern of disparities is likely to be repeated

within as well as between countries [6]. Poorer households and poorer regions within a particular country are likely to have high diarrhea mortality risk and lower levels of timely vaccination coverage. This suggests that distribution of the benefit, cost-effectiveness and residual (post-vaccination) rotavirus mortality are also likely to differ after vaccine introduction. This paper estimates the geographic and socio-economic distributional effects of rotavirus vaccine introduction within a subset of countries eligible for funding by the GAVI Alliance. This includes the distribution of benefits, cost-effectiveness, and residual (post-vaccine introduction) mortality risk. The main research question is ‘how do outcomes differ across geographic and socio-economic gradients at the regional, national, and sub-national scales?’ GSK-3 cancer Better understanding of distributional effects is essential in tackling the substantial remaining rotavirus mortality burden, even with vaccination. Distributional effects also have implications Selleckchem Afatinib for decisions about where to invest first, even among and within GAVI-eligible countries. Best practices for economic evaluations of health interventions

typically require distributional analyses to assess who within a population is more or less likely to benefit. This is based on an understanding that cost-effectiveness is just one criterion in decision-making and other factors, such as who benefits, also need to be

considered. While in practice, few vaccine cost-effectiveness studies directly explore these issues, there is evidence that vaccination can have both pro-poor and anti-poor distributional effects. Bishai et al. demonstrated that near universal measles vaccination in Bangladesh reduced disparities in under-5 mortality [7]. Michaelidis et al. found that efforts in reducing disparities in influenza vaccination among elderly minority groups in the US was moderate Dipeptidyl peptidase to highly cost-effective [8]. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination provides a somewhat different scenario. While the burden of cervical cancer is disproportionately borne by poorer women with limited access to prevention and timely treatment, vaccination programs may similarly miss the target population [9] and [10]. Several approaches have been suggested for addressing distributional and equity concerns in cost-effectiveness. One approach is to explicitly weight outcomes among the poor as higher than those among better off sub-populations through an equity weight [11] and [12]. In some cases, weights are suggested based on socio-economic status and in other contexts based on the severity of individual conditions [13]. In some contexts there is an equity-efficiency tradeoff where the most impactful or efficient is not the most equitable [14]. Walensky et al.