Identificador persistente para citar o vincular este elemento: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/71786
Campo DC Valoridioma
dc.contributor.authorZozaya González, Mª Neboaen_US
dc.contributor.authorAlcala Revilla, B.en_US
dc.contributor.authorArrazola Martinez, P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChavarri Bravo, J. R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCuesta Esteve, Ien_US
dc.contributor.authorGarcia Rojas, A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMartinon-Torres, F.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRedondo Marguello, E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCuadrado, A. Riveroen_US
dc.contributor.authorTamames Gomez, S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorVillaseca Carmena, J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHidalgo-Vega, A.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-28T12:13:05Z-
dc.date.available2020-04-28T12:13:05Z-
dc.date.issued2020en_US
dc.identifier.issn2164-5515en_US
dc.identifier.otherWoS-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/71786-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To advance the development of an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines in Spain, and to agree on the desirable award criteria and their relative weight. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee of seven health-care professionals and managers developed a partial multi-criteria decision analysis to determine the award criteria that should be considered and their specific weights for the public procurement of routine vaccines and seasonal influenza vaccines, considering their legal viability. A re-test of the results was carried out. The current situation was analyzed through 118 tender specifications and compared to the ideal framework. Results: Price is the prevailing award criterion for the public procurement of both routine (weighting of 60% versus 40% for all other criteria) and influenza (36% versus 64%) vaccines. Ideally, 22 criteria should be considered for routine vaccines, grouped and weighted into five domains: efficacy (weighting of 29%), economic aspects (27%), vaccine characteristics (22%), presentation form and packaging (13%), and others (9%). Per criteria set, price was the most important criterion (22%), followed by effectiveness (9%), and composition/formulation (7%). Regarding influenza vaccines, 20 criteria were selected, grouped, and weighted: efficacy (29%), economic aspects (25%), vaccine characteristics (20%), presentation form and packaging (16%), and others (11%). Per criteria set, price was also the most relevant criterion (19%), followed by composition/formulation (8%), and effectiveness (8%). Conclusions: Contrary to the current approach, technical award criteria should prevail over economic criteria in an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofHuman Vaccines and Immunotherapeuticsen_US
dc.sourceHuman Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics [ISSN 2164-5515], v. 16(11),p. 2873-2884en_US
dc.subject3202 Epidemologiaen_US
dc.subject.otherVaccinesen_US
dc.subject.otherAward Criteriaen_US
dc.subject.otherPublic Procurementen_US
dc.subject.otherSpainen_US
dc.subject.otherMulti-Criteria Decision Analysisen_US
dc.subject.otherFramework Agreementen_US
dc.titlePathway towards an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines in Spain: a multi-criteria decision analysisen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/Articleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/21645515.2020.1732164en_US
dc.identifier.isi000524009000001-
dc.identifier.eissn2164-554X-
dc.description.lastpage12en_US
dc.description.firstpage1en_US
dc.investigacionCiencias de la Saluden_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.contributor.daisngidNo ID-
dc.description.numberofpages12en_US
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Gonzalez, NZ-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Revilla, BA-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Martinez, PA-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Bravo, JRC-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Esteve, IC-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Rojas, AG-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Martinon-Torres, F-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Marguello, ER-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Cuadrado, AR-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Gomez, ST-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Carmena, JV-
dc.contributor.wosstandardWOS:Hidalgo-Vega, A-
dc.date.coverdate2020en_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-MEDen_US
dc.description.sjr1,043
dc.description.jcr3,452
dc.description.sjrqQ1
dc.description.jcrqQ2
dc.description.scieSCIE
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextSin texto completo-
crisitem.author.deptGIR Economía de la salud y políticas públicas-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0003-4618-6894-
crisitem.author.parentorgDepartamento de Métodos Cuantitativos en Economía y Gestión-
crisitem.author.fullNameZozaya Gonzalez,Neboa-
Colección:Artículos
Vista resumida

Google ScholarTM

Verifica

Altmetric


Comparte



Exporta metadatos



Los elementos en ULPGC accedaCRIS están protegidos por derechos de autor con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.