• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Hum Vaccin Immunother . Australian preferences for influenza vaccine attributes and cost: A discrete choice experiment

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Hum Vaccin Immunother


. 2025 Dec;21(1):2440164.
doi: 10.1080/21645515.2024.2440164. Epub 2024 Dec 21. Australian preferences for influenza vaccine attributes and cost: A discrete choice experiment

Simon Fifer[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Lili Toh[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Daniel Yu[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Katherine Young[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jason Menche[SUP] 2 [/SUP]



Affiliations
Free article Abstract

People in Australia have access to different influenza vaccines, but may be unaware of their options and features. Preference studies for differentiated influenza vaccines including cell-based vaccines are limited, particularly in Australia. This study investigated which influenza vaccine attributes people in Australia value using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Adults in Australia ineligible for free influenza vaccines had been vaccinated in the last 5 years and intended to be vaccinated again completed an online survey. Participants (N = 1203) were presented three influenza vaccine profiles described by eight attributes. Half the DCE scenarios described influenza season severity to be the same as last year, and the other half as more severe. DCE data were analyzed using a mixed multinomial logit (MMNL) model. All eight attributes significantly predicted vaccine choice (p < .05). Regardless of influenza season severity, participants preferred a vaccine: with greater protection, designed to be an exact match to circulating strains (match), using modern technology, manufactured by an Australian company, available at pharmacies, preferred by health care professionals (HCP), government funded for high-risk individuals and having lower cost. The top three attributes by importance were protection, match and cost. Participants were willing to pay more for match and higher protection. The Marginal Willingness to Pay (MWTP) for the most important attributes, excluding cost, were AUD $1.61/$2.18 for each additional percent in protection (same/more severe season), AUD $25.37/$32.37 for match and AUD $4.06/$15.97 for HCP preference. Findings indicate that match, protection, cost and HCP preference are key to vaccine choice, highlighting the importance of shared decision-making.

Keywords: Seasonal influenza; cell-based vaccines; discrete choice experiment; influenza vaccine choice; patient preferences.

 
Back
Top Bottom