• 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.

Distinguishing vaccine efficacy and effectiveness

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Vaccine. 2012 Aug 31. [Epub ahead of print]
Distinguishing vaccine efficacy and effectiveness.
Shim E, Galvani AP.
Source

Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, 130 DeSoto Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15261, USA; Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

Mathematical models of disease transmission and vaccination typically assume that protective vaccine efficacy (i.e. the relative reduction in the transmission rate among vaccinated individuals) is equivalent to direct effectiveness of vaccine. This assumption has not been evaluated.
METHODS:

We used dynamic epidemiological models of influenza and measles vaccines to evaluate the common measures of vaccine effectiveness in terms of both the protection of individuals and disease control within populations. We determined how vaccine-mediated reductions in attack rates translate into vaccine efficacy as well as into the common population measures of 'direct', 'indirect', 'total', and 'overall' effects of vaccination with examples of compartmental models of influenza and measles vaccination.
RESULTS:

We found that the typical parameterization of vaccine efficacy using direct effectiveness of vaccine can lead to the underestimation of the impact of vaccine. Such underestimation occurs when the vaccine is assumed to offer partial protection to every vaccinated person, and becomes worse when the level of vaccine coverage is low. Nevertheless, estimates of 'total', 'indirect' and 'overall' effectiveness increase with vaccination coverage in the population. Furthermore, we show how the measures of vaccine efficacy and vaccine effectiveness can be correctly calculated.
CONCLUSIONS:

Typical parameterization of vaccine efficacy in mathematical models may underestimate the actual protective effect of the vaccine, resulting in discordance between the actual effects of vaccination at the population level and predictions made by models. This work shows how models can be correctly parameterized from clinical trial data.

Copyright ? 2012. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

PMID:
22944629
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22944629
 
Back
Top Bottom