• 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.

A Dynamic Model for Evaluation of the Bias of Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates from Observational Studies

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Am J Epidemiol. 2018 Oct 17. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwy240. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]A Dynamic Model for Evaluation of the Bias of Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates from Observational Studies.[/h] Ainslie KEC[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]2[/SUP], Shi M[SUP]1[/SUP], Haber M[SUP]1[/SUP], Orenstein WA[SUP]3[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] As influenza vaccination is now widely recommended in the United States, observational studies based on patients with acute respiratory illness (ARI) remain the only option to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). We developed a dynamic probability model to evaluate bias of VE estimates from passive surveillance cohort, test-negative, and traditional case-control studies. The model includes two covariates (health status and health awareness), which may affect the probabilities of vaccination, developing ARI, and seeking medical care. Our results suggest that test-negative studies produce unbiased estimates of VE against medically-attended influenza when (1) vaccination does not affect the probability of non-influenza ARI and (2) health status has the same effect on the probability of influenza and non-influenza ARIs. The same estimate may be severely biased (i.e., estimated VE - true VE ≥ 0.20) for estimating VE against symptomatic influenza if the vaccine affects the probability of seeking care against influenza ARI. VE estimates from test-negative studies may also be severely biased for both outcomes of interest when vaccination affects the probability of non-influenza ARI, but estimates from passive surveillance cohort studies are unbiased in this case. Finally, VE estimates from traditional case-control studies suffer from bias regardless of the source of bias.


PMID: 30329006 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwy240
 
Back
Top Bottom