ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2022
Evaluating the Impact of Meningococcal Vaccines With Synthetic Controls.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modeling the persistence of 4CMenB vaccine protection against real world meningococcal B disease in adolescents.NPJ vaccines · 2024Article
- Quasi-experimental methods for pharmacoepidemiology: difference-in-differences and synthetic control methods with case studies for vaccine evaluation.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Genomic Surveillance of Invasive Meningococcal Disease During a National MenW Outbreak in Australia, 2017-2018.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Genetic Features of a Representative Panel of 110 Meningococcal B Isolates to Assess the Efficacy of Meningococcal B Vaccines.mSphere · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) has a low and unpredictable incidence, presenting challenges for real-world evaluations of meningococcal vaccines. Traditionally, meningococcal vaccine impact is evaluated by predicting counterfactuals from pre-immunization IMD incidences, possibly controlling for IMD in unvaccinated age groups, but the selection of controls can influence results. We retrospectively applied a synthetic control (SC) method, previously used for pneumococcal disease, to data from 2 programs for immunization of infants against serogroups B and C IMD in England and Brazil. Time series of infectious/noninfectious diseases in infants and IMD cases in older unvaccinated age groups were used as candidate controls, automatically combined in a SC through Bayesian variable selection. SC closely predicted IMD in absence of vaccination, adjusting for nontrivial changes in IMD incidence. Vaccine impact estimates were in line with previous assessments. IMD cases in unvaccinated age groups were the most frequent SC-selected controls. Similar results were obtained when excluding IMD from control sets and using other diseases only, particularly respiratory diseases and measles. Using non-IMD controls may be important where there are herd immunity effects. SC is a robust and flexible method that addresses uncertainty introduced when equally plausible controls exhibit different post-immunization behaviors, allowing objective comparisons of IMD programs between countries.
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.