|
|
|
|
LEADER |
02986nam a2200325Ia 4500 |
001 |
10.2196-33099 |
008 |
220630s2022 CNT 000 0 und d |
020 |
|
|
|a 23692960 (ISSN)
|
245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Characterizing Anchoring Bias in Vaccine Comparator Selection Due to Health Care Utilization With COVID-19 and Influenza: Observational Cohort Study
|
260 |
|
0 |
|b NLM (Medline)
|c 2022
|
520 |
3 |
|
|a BACKGROUND: Observational data enables large-scale vaccine safety surveillance but requires careful evaluation of the potential sources of bias. One potential source of bias is the index date selection procedure for the unvaccinated cohort or unvaccinated comparison time ("anchoring"). OBJECTIVE: Here, we evaluated the different index date selection procedures for 2 vaccinations: COVID-19 and influenza. METHODS: For each vaccine, we extracted patient baseline characteristics on the index date and up to 450 days prior and then compared them to the characteristics of the unvaccinated patients indexed on (1) an arbitrary date or (2) a date of a visit. Additionally, we compared vaccinated patients indexed on the date of vaccination and the same patients indexed on a prior date or visit. RESULTS: COVID-19 vaccination and influenza vaccination differ drastically from each other in terms of the populations vaccinated and their status on the day of vaccination. When compared to indexing on a visit in the unvaccinated population, influenza vaccination had markedly higher covariate proportions, and COVID-19 vaccination had lower proportions of most covariates on the index date. In contrast, COVID-19 vaccination had similar covariate proportions when compared to an arbitrary date. These effects attenuated, but were still present, with a longer lookback period. The effect of day 0 was present even when the patients served as their own controls. CONCLUSIONS: Patient baseline characteristics are sensitive to the choice of the index date. In vaccine safety studies, unexposed index event should represent vaccination settings. Study designs previously used to assess influenza vaccination must be reassessed for COVID-19 to account for a potentially healthier population and lack of medical activity on the day of vaccination. ©Anna Ostropolets, Patrick B Ryan, Martijn J Schuemie, George Hripcsak. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 17.06.2022.
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a anchoring
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a bias
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a cohort
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a comparator selection
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a COVID-19
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a flu
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a index
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a influenza
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a observational
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a time-at-risk
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a utilization
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a vaccination
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a vaccine
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Hripcsak, G.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Ostropolets, A.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Ryan, P.B.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Schuemie, M.J.
|e author
|
773 |
|
|
|t JMIR public health and surveillance
|
856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.2196/33099
|