Vaccine Safety Surveillance Using Routinely Collected Healthcare Data—An Empirical Evaluation of Epidemiological Designs

Author:

Schuemie Martijn J.,Arshad Faaizah,Pratt Nicole,Nyberg Fredrik,Alshammari Thamir M,Hripcsak George,Ryan Patrick,Prieto-Alhambra Daniel,Lai Lana Y. H.,Li Xintong,Fortin Stephen,Minty Evan,Suchard Marc A.

Abstract

Background: Routinely collected healthcare data such as administrative claims and electronic health records (EHR) can complement clinical trials and spontaneous reports to detect previously unknown risks of vaccines, but uncertainty remains about the behavior of alternative epidemiologic designs to detect and declare a true risk early.Methods: Using three claims and one EHR database, we evaluate several variants of the case-control, comparative cohort, historical comparator, and self-controlled designs against historical vaccinations using real negative control outcomes (outcomes with no evidence to suggest that they could be caused by the vaccines) and simulated positive control outcomes.Results: Most methods show large type 1 error, often identifying false positive signals. The cohort method appears either positively or negatively biased, depending on the choice of comparator index date. Empirical calibration using effect-size estimates for negative control outcomes can bring type 1 error closer to nominal, often at the cost of increasing type 2 error. After calibration, the self-controlled case series (SCCS) design most rapidly detects small true effect sizes, while the historical comparator performs well for strong effects.Conclusion: When applying any method for vaccine safety surveillance we recommend considering the potential for systematic error, especially due to confounding, which for many designs appears to be substantial. Adjusting for age and sex alone is likely not sufficient to address differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated, and for the cohort method the choice of index date is important for the comparability of the groups. Analysis of negative control outcomes allows both quantification of the systematic error and, if desired, subsequent empirical calibration to restore type 1 error to its nominal value. In order to detect weaker signals, one may have to accept a higher type 1 error.

Publisher

Frontiers Media SA

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Pharmacology

Reference18 articles.

1. Importance of Background Rates of Disease in Assessment of Vaccine Safety during Mass Immunisation with Pandemic H1N1 Influenza Vaccines;Black;Lancet,2009

2. Increasing Trust in Real-World Evidence through Evaluation of Observational Data Quality;Blacketer;J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc.,2021

3. Four Different Study Designs to Evaluate Vaccine Safety Were Equally Validated with Contrasting Limitations;Glanz;J. Clin. Epidemiol.,2006

4. Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI): Opportunities for Observational Researchers;Hripcsak;Stud. Health Technol. Inf.,2015

5. Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Databases for Clinical Research in Colon and Rectal Surgery;Kulaylat;Clin. Colon Rectal Surg.,2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3