Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26235370›Full record

ReviewVaccine2015

Methodological challenges in measuring vaccine effectiveness using population cohorts in low resource settings.

C King, J Beard, A C Crampin, A Costello, C Mwansambo, N A Cunliffe, R S Heyderman, N French, N Bar-Zeev, VacSurv Consortium

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

10 authors.

C KingInstitute for Global Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, United Kingdom. Electronic address: c.king@ucl.ac.uk.
J BeardInstitute for Global Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, United Kingdom; London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
A C CrampinLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Karonga Prevention Study, Karonga, Malawi.
A CostelloInstitute for Global Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, United Kingdom.
C MwansamboMaiMwana Project Mchinji, Parent and Child Health Initiative, Lilongwe, Malawi; Ministry of Health, Lilongwe, Malawi.
N A CunliffeInstitute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
R S HeydermanMalawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, College of Medicine, University of Malawi, Blantyre, Malawi; Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom; Division of Infection & Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
N FrenchInstitute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom; Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, College of Medicine, University of Malawi, Blantyre, Malawi.
N Bar-ZeevInstitute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom; Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, College of Medicine, University of Malawi, Blantyre, Malawi.
VacSurv Consortium

Funding

Wellcome Trust 098610Wellcome Trust WT091909/B/10/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Post-licensure real world evaluation of vaccine implementation is important for establishing evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) and programme impact, including indirect effects. Large cohort studies offer an important epidemiological approach for evaluating VE, but have inherent methodological challenges. Since March 2012, we have conducted an open prospective cohort study in two sites in rural Malawi to evaluate the post-introduction effectiveness of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) against all-cause post-neonatal infant mortality and monovalent rotavirus vaccine (RV1) against diarrhoea-related post-neonatal infant mortality. Our study sites cover a population of 500,000, with a baseline post-neonatal infant mortality of 25 per 1000 live births. We conducted a methodological review of cohort studies for vaccine effectiveness in a developing country setting, applied to our study context. Based on published literature, we outline key considerations when defining the denominator (study population), exposure (vaccination status) and outcome ascertainment (mortality and cause of death) of such studies. We assess various definitions in these three domains, in terms of their impact on power, effect size and potential biases and their direction, using our cohort study for illustration. Based on this iterative process, we discuss the pros and cons of our final per-protocol analysis plan. Since no single set of definitions or analytical approach accounts for all possible biases, we propose sensitivity analyses to interrogate our assumptions and methodological decisions. In the poorest regions of the world where routine vital birth and death surveillance are frequently unavailable and the burden of disease and death is greatest We conclude that provided the balance between definitions and their overall assumed impact on estimated VE are acknowledged, such large scale real-world cohort studies can provide crucial information to policymakers by providing robust and compelling evidence of total benefits of newly introduced vaccines on reducing child mortality.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic MethodsDeveloping CountriesHumansMalawiPneumococcal VaccinesProspective StudiesRotavirus VaccinesSurvival AnalysisTreatment OutcomeVaccines, Attenuated13-valent pneumococcal vaccinePneumococcal VaccinesRIX4414 vaccineRotavirus VaccinesVaccines, AttenuatedChildrenCohortDiarrhoeaMethodologyPCV13Pneumococcal diseasePneumoniaRV1Survival analysisVaccine effectiveness

Identifiers

PMID26235370
PMCPMC4570930

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.