ArticleVaccine2017
Comparison of two control groups for estimation of oral cholera vaccine effectiveness using a case-control study design.
Article in Vaccine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Estimating the proportion of clinically suspected cholera cases that are true Vibrio cholerae infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS medicine · 2023Pooled it
- The Use of Test-negative Controls to Monitor Vaccine Effectiveness: A Systematic Review of Methodology.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2020Pooled it
- A comparison of the test-negative and the matched case-control study designs for estimation of EV71 vaccine immunological surrogate endpoints from a randomized controlled trial.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Trial
- An Age-stratified, Randomized Immunogenicity Trial of Killed Oral Cholera Vaccine with Delayed Second Dose in Cameroon.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2022Trial
- 5-Year effectiveness of an oral cholera vaccine in a cholera outbreak in rural Haiti: a case-control study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Evaluation of pre-exposure vaccine effectiveness against mpox during the 2022-2023 mpox outbreak in the Madrid region (Spain): a test-negative design.BMJ public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Poor Sensitivity of Stool Culture Compared to Polymerase Chain Reaction in Surveillance forOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Factors associated with diarrheal disease among children aged 1-5 years in a cholera epidemic in rural Haiti.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
- Hospital admissions due to COVID-19 in Scotland after one dose of vaccine.Lancet (London, England) · 2021Article
- Temporal Confounding in the Test-Negative Design.American journal of epidemiology · 2020Article
- Bias correction methods for test-negative designs in the presence of misclassification.Epidemiology and infection · 2020Article
- Homelessness and Hepatitis A-San Diego County, 2016-2018.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2020Article
- Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia.Epidemiology and infection · 2020Observational
- Case-Control Study of Rotavirus Vaccine Effectiveness Compared to Test-Negative Controls or Hospital Controls.Journal of epidemiology · 2019Article
- Challenges in estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness.Expert review of vaccines · 2019Review
- Measurement of Vaccine Direct Effects Under the Test-Negative Design.American journal of epidemiology · 2018Article
- A Metagenomic Approach to Evaluating Surface Water Quality in Haiti.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Long-term effectiveness of one and two doses of a killed, bivalent, whole-cell oral cholera vaccine in Haiti: an extended case-control study.The Lancet. Global health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCase-control studies to quantify oral cholera vaccine effectiveness (VE) often rely on neighbors without diarrhea as community controls. Test-negative controls can be easily recruited and may minimize bias due to differential health-seeking behavior and recall. We compared VE estimates derived from community and test-negative controls and conducted bias-indicator analyses to assess potential bias with community controls.
methodsFrom October 2012 through November 2016, patients with acute watery diarrhea were recruited from cholera treatment centers in rural Haiti. Cholera cases had a positive stool culture. Non-cholera diarrhea cases (test-negative controls and non-cholera diarrhea cases for bias-indicator analyses) had a negative culture and rapid test. Up to four community controls were matched to diarrhea cases by age group, time, and neighborhood.
resultsPrimary analyses included 181 cholera cases, 157 non-cholera diarrhea cases, 716 VE community controls and 625 bias-indicator community controls. VE for self-reported vaccination with two doses was consistent across the two control groups, with statistically significant VE estimates ranging from 72 to 74%. Sensitivity analyses revealed similar, though somewhat attenuated estimates for self-reported two dose VE. Bias-indicator estimates were consistently less than one, with VE estimates ranging from 19 to 43%, some of which were statistically significant.
conclusionsOCV estimates from case-control analyses using community and test-negative controls were similar. While bias-indicator analyses suggested possible over-estimation of VE estimates using community controls, test-negative analyses suggested this bias, if present, was minimal. Test-negative controls can be a valid low-cost and time-efficient alternative to community controls for OCV effectiveness estimation and may be especially relevant in emergency situations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.