Best of intent, worst of both worlds: why sequentially combining epidemiological designs does not improve signal detection in vaccine safety surveillance

Author:

Arshad FaaizahORCID,Schuemie Martijn J.ORCID,Minty Evan P.,Alshammari Thamir M.ORCID,Lai Lana Y.H.,Duarte-Salles TalitaORCID,Fortin Stephen,Nyberg FredrikORCID,Ryan Patrick B.,Hripcsak George,Prieto-Alhambra DanielORCID,Suchard Marc A.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundVaccine safety surveillance commonly includes a serial testing approach with a sensitive method for “signal generation” and specific method for “signal validation.” Whether serially combining epidemiological designs improves both sensitivity and specificity is unknown.MethodsWe assessed the overall performance of serial testing using three administrative claims and one electronic health record database. We compared Type I and II errors before and after empirical calibration for historical comparator, SCCS, and the serial combination of those designs against six vaccine exposure groups with 93 negative control and 279 imputed positive control outcomes.ResultsHistorical comparator mostly had lower Type II error than SCCS. SCCS had lower Type I error than the historical comparator. Before empirical calibration, serial combination increased specificity and decreased sensitivity. Type II errors mostly exceeded 50%. After empirical calibration, Type I errors returned to nominal; sensitivity was lowest when the methods were combined.ConclusionWe recommend against the serial approach in vaccine safety surveillance. While serial combination produced fewer false positive signals compared to the most specific method, it generated more false negative signals compared to the most sensitive method. Using the noisy historical comparator in front of SCCS deteriorated overall performance in evaluating safety signals.Key MessagesUsing the serial approach in vaccine safety surveillance did not improve overall performance: specificity increased but sensitivity decreased.Without empirical calibration, Type II errors exceeded 50%; after empirical calibration, Type I error rates returned to nominal with negligible change to Type II error rates.While prior research has suggested high sensitivity of the historical comparator method in distinguishing true safety signals, there were cases when self-controlled case series was more sensitive.Vaccine safety surveillance is becoming increasingly important, so monitoring systems should closely consider the utility and sequence of epidemiological designs.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference37 articles.

1. Bloomberg [Internet]. [cited 2021 Nov 18]. Available from: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/

2. Website [Internet]. Available from: Holder J. Tracking Coronavirus Vaccinations Around the World. The New York Times [Internet]. 2021 Jan 29 [cited 2021 Aug 16]; Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/world/covid-vaccinations-tracker.html

3. CDC. COVID Data Tracker [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2021 Jul 28]. Available from: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/

4. Holder J. Tracking Coronavirus Vaccinations Around the World. The New York Times [Internet]. 2021 Jan 29 [cited 2021 Aug 16]; Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/world/covid-vaccinations-tracker.html

5. COVID-19 Vaccine Tracker [Internet]. [cited 2021 Jul 28]. Available from: https://vaccinetracker.ecdc.europa.eu/public/extensions/COVID-19/vaccine-tracker.html

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