{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03225806451612903, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020161290322580645, 'mean_word_length': 5.406451612903226, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Letter to the editor regarding “Budget impact analysis of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in Colombia”

Gomez and colleagues [1] recently published a budget impact analysis (BIA) evaluating pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) use over 5 years (2020 to 2024) in the National Immunization Program (NIP) in Colombia for children < 5 years of age. The budget impact of the 10-valent (PCV10) and the 13-valent (PCV13) vaccination scenarios were each compared to a no vaccination base-case scenario from the perspective of the health system, by following the best practices from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Task Force on BIA [2] and using relevant outcomes representing the clinical course of pneumococcal disease. Due to the relevance of the study for public health officials, we would like to share for consideration points around methods, assumptions, and input parameters used in this analysis, which are described in the following sections.