Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35450781›Full record

ArticleVaccine2022

Designing an evidence-based Bayesian network for estimating the risk versus benefits of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

Helen J Mayfield, Colleen L Lau, Jane E Sinclair, Samuel J Brown, Andrew Baird, John Litt, Aapeli Vuorinen, Kirsty R Short, Michael Waller, Kerrie Mengersen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Being Bayesian in the 2020s: opportunities and challenges in the practice of modern applied Bayesian statistics.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Helen J MayfieldSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Electronic address: h.mayfield@uq.edu.au.
Colleen L LauSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Jane E SinclairSchool of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, Faculty of Science, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Samuel J BrownSchool of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, Faculty of Science, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Andrew BairdSt Kilda Medical Group, St Kilda, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
John LittDiscipline of General Practice, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Scientific Advisory Committee, Immunisation Coalition, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Aapeli VuorinenData Science Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Kirsty R ShortSchool of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, Faculty of Science, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Michael WallerSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Kerrie MengersenSchool of Mathematical Sciences, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
University of Queensland · AUColumbia University · USQueensland University of Technology · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Uncertainty surrounding the risk of developing and dying from Thrombosis and Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS) associated with the AstraZeneca (AZ) COVID-19 vaccine may contribute to vaccine hesitancy. A model is urgently needed to combine and effectively communicate evidence on the risks versus benefits of the AZ vaccine. We developed a Bayesian network to consolidate evidence on risks and benefits of the AZ vaccine, and parameterised the model using data from a range of empirical studies, government reports, and expert advisory groups. Expert judgement was used to interpret the available evidence and determine the model structure, relevant variables, data for inclusion, and how these data were used to inform the model. The model can be used as a decision-support tool to generate scenarios based on age, sex, virus variant and community transmission rates, making it useful for individuals, clinicians, and researchers to assess the chances of different health outcomes. Model outputs include the risk of dying from TTS following the AZ COVID-19 vaccine, the risk of dying from COVID-19 or COVID-19-associated atypical severe blood clots under different scenarios. Although the model is focused on Australia, it can be adapted to international settings by re-parameterising it with local data. This paper provides detailed description of the model-building methodology, which can be used to expand the scope of the model to include other COVID-19 vaccines, booster doses, comorbidities and other health outcomes (e.g., long COVID) to ensure the model remains relevant in the face of constantly changing discussion on risks versus benefits of COVID-19 vaccination.

Indexed as

COVID-19ThrombocytopeniaBayes TheoremChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansPost-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesAdverse eventsBayesian networkCOVID-19Informed decision-makingVaccination

Identifiers

PMID35450781
PMCPMC8989774
OpenAlexW4225390123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.