Value Frameworks for Vaccines: Which Dimensions Are Most Relevant?

Jeroen Luyten*, Roselinde Kessels, Corinne Vandermeulen, Philippe Beutels

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review


In addition to more narrow criteria such as safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, vaccines can also be evaluated based on broader criteria such as their economic impact, contribution to disease eradication objectives, caregiver aspects, financial protection offered, equity or social acceptability. We summarize a survey executed in a sample of the population (N=1000) in Flanders, Belgium, in which we investigated support for using these broader criteria to evaluate vaccines for funding decisions. By means of both favourable and unfavourable framings of a hypothetical vaccine across 40 value dimensions, we find support for the view that people indeed consider a broad range of medical and socio-economic criteria relevant. Several of these are not incorporated in standard evaluation frameworks for vaccines. The different results we find for different framings highlight the importance of developing a consistent a priori value framework for vaccine evaluation, rather than evaluating vaccines on an ad hoc basis.
Original languageEnglish
Article number628
Number of pages16
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2020


  • evaluation space
  • health technology assessment
  • public involvement
  • public preferences
  • vaccine evaluation


Dive into the research topics of 'Value Frameworks for Vaccines: Which Dimensions Are Most Relevant?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this