ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2021
Modeling the Impacts of Clinical Influenza Testing on Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates.
Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza A(H3N2)-Associated Hospitalized Illness: United States, 2022.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines for Preventing Covid-19 Hospitalizations in the United States.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTest-negative design studies for evaluating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) enroll patients with acute respiratory infection. Enrollment typically occurs before influenza status is determined, resulting in over-enrollment of influenza-negative patients. With availability of rapid and accurate molecular clinical testing, influenza status could be ascertained before enrollment, thus improving study efficiency. We estimate potential biases in VE when using clinical testing.
methodsWe simulate data assuming 60% vaccinated, 25% of those vaccinated are influenza positive, and VE of 50%. We show the effect on VE in 5 scenarios.
resultsVaccine effectiveness is affected only when clinical testing preferentially targets patients based on both vaccination and influenza status. Vaccine effectiveness is overestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 39% of vaccinated influenza-positive patients and 24% of others. VE is also overestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 8% of unvaccinated influenza-positive patients and 27% of others. Vaccine effectiveness is underestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 32% of unvaccinated influenza-negative patients and 18% of others.
conclusionsAlthough differential clinical testing by vaccine receipt and influenza positivity may produce errors in estimated VE, bias in testing would have to be substantial and overall proportion of patients tested would have to be small to result in a meaningful difference in VE.
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.