Authors’ reply to Rappuoli and colleagues, Black, and Glennie and colleagues

We do not believe our analyses adopted a set of singularly vaccine unfavourable conditions.1 A University of Warwick team commissioned by the Department of Health to independently review the modelling and parameters found “no major defects with the model,” recommending changes that would have led to vaccination appearing less cost effective than in our base case.2 We agree with Rappuoli and colleagues and Black that models and cost effectiveness analyses should be viewed as tools to aid decision making rather than as “gate keepers.”3 4 Indeed, in our discussion we stated that, because of the substantial uncertainty about the …