Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21818350›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Influenza vaccine effectiveness in the elderly based on administrative databases: change in immunization habit as a marker for bias.

Travis S Hottes, Danuta M Skowronski, Brett Hiebert, Naveed Z Janjua, Leslie L Roos, Paul Van Caeseele, Barbara J Law, Gaston De Serres

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. HSC Aging and Senescent Immune Remodeling.Trends in immunology · 2015
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Travis S HottesEpidemiology Services, BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Danuta M Skowronski
Brett Hiebert
Naveed Z Janjua
Leslie L Roos
Paul Van Caeseele
Barbara J Law
Gaston De Serres

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research PAN 83140
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdministrative databases provide efficient methods to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against severe outcomes in the elderly but are prone to intractable bias. This study returns to one of the linked population databases by which IVE against hospitalization and death in the elderly was first assessed. We explore IVE across six more recent influenza seasons, including periods before, during, and after peak activity to identify potential markers for bias. METHODS AND

findingsAcute respiratory hospitalization and all-cause mortality were compared between immunized/non-immunized community-dwelling seniors ≥65 years through administrative databases in Manitoba, Canada between 2000-01 and 2005-06. IVE was compared during pre-season/influenza/post-season periods through logistic regression with multivariable adjustment (age/sex/income/residence/prior influenza or pneumococcal immunization/medical visits/comorbidity), stratification based on prior influenza immunization history, and propensity scores. Analysis during pre-season periods assessed baseline differences between immunized and unimmunized groups. The study population included ∼140,000 seniors, of whom 50-60% were immunized annually. Adjustment for key covariates and use of propensity scores consistently increased IVE. Estimates were paradoxically higher pre-season and for all-cause mortality vs. acute respiratory hospitalization. Stratified analysis showed that those twice consecutively and currently immunized were always at significantly lower hospitalization/mortality risk with odds ratios (OR) of 0.60 [95%CI0.48-0.75] and 0.58 [0.53-0.64] pre-season and 0.77 [0.69-0.86] and 0.71 [0.66-0.77] during influenza circulation, relative to the consistently unimmunized. Conversely, those forgoing immunization when twice previously immunized were always at significantly higher hospitalization/mortality risk with OR of 1.41 [1.14-1.73] and 2.45 [2.21-2.72] pre-season and 1.21 [1.03-1.43] and 1.78 [1.61-1.96] during influenza circulation.

conclusionsThe most pronounced IVE estimates were paradoxically observed pre-season, indicating bias tending to over-estimate vaccine protection. Change in immunization habit from that of the prior two years may be a marker for this bias in administrative data sets; however, no analytic technique explored could adjust for its influence. Improved methods to achieve valid interpretation of protection in the elderly are needed.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBiasCanadaDatabases as TopicFemaleHospitalizationHumansImmunizationInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesMaleOdds RatioSeasonsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID21818350
PMCPMC3144220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.