Potential Biases Arising From Epidemic Dynamics in Observational Seroprotection Studies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kahn R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7499481 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Potential Biases Arising From Epidemic Dynamics in Observational Seroprotection Studies.
Kahn Rebecca R Kennedy-Shaffer Lee L Grad Yonatan H YH Robins James M JM Lipsitch Marc M
American journal of epidemiology 20210201 2
The extent and duration of immunity following infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are critical outstanding questions about the epidemiology of this novel virus, and studies are needed to evaluate the effects of serostatus on reinfection. Understanding the potential sources of bias and methods for alleviating biases in these studies is important for informing their design and analysis. Confounding by individual-level risk factors in observational studies li ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The test-negative design (TND) is a popular method for evaluating vaccine effectiveness (VE). A "classical" TND study includes symptomatic individuals tested for the disease targeted by the vaccine to estimate VE against symptomatic infection. However, recent applications of the TND have attempted to estimate VE against infection by including all tested individuals, regardless of their symptoms. In this article, we use directed acyclic graphs and simulations to investigate potential biases in TND studies of COVID-19 VE arising from the use of this "alternative" approach, particularly when applied during periods of widespread testing. We show that the inclusion of asymptomatic individuals can potentially lead to collider stratification bias, uncontrolled confounding by health and healthcare-seeking behaviors (HSBs), and differential outcome misclassification. While our focus is on the COVID-19 setting, the issues discussed here may also be relevant in the context of other infectious diseases. This may be particularly true in scenarios where there is either a high baseline prevalence of infection, a strong correlation between HSBs and vaccination, different testing practices for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, or settings where both the vaccine under study attenuates symptoms of infection and diagnostic accuracy is modified by the presence of symptoms.
| S-EPMC11879563 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis study aims to discuss and assess the impact of three prevalent methodological biases: competing risks, immortal-time bias, and confounding bias in real-world observational studies evaluating treatment effectiveness. We use a demonstrative observational data example of COVID-19 patients to assess the impact of these biases and propose potential solutions.MethodsWe describe competing risks, immortal-time bias, and time-fixed confounding bias by evaluating treatment effectiveness in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. For our demonstrative analysis, we use observational data from the registry of patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to the Bellvitge University Hospital in Spain from March 2020 to February 2021 and met our predefined inclusion criteria. We compare estimates of a single-dose, time-dependent treatment with the standard of care. We analyze the treatment effectiveness using common statistical approaches, either by ignoring or only partially accounting for the methodological biases. To address these challenges, we emulate a target trial through the clone-censor-weight approach.ResultsOverlooking competing risk bias and employing the naïve Kaplan-Meier estimator led to increased in-hospital death probabilities in patients with COVID-19. Specifically, in the treatment effectiveness analysis, the Kaplan-Meier estimator resulted in an in-hospital mortality of 45.6% for treated patients and 59.0% for untreated patients. In contrast, employing an emulated trial framework with the weighted Aalen-Johansen estimator, we observed that in-hospital death probabilities were reduced to 27.9% in the "X"-treated arm and 40.1% in the non-"X"-treated arm. Immortal-time bias led to an underestimated hazard ratio of treatment.ConclusionOverlooking competing risks, immortal-time bias, and confounding bias leads to shifted estimates of treatment effects. Applying the naïve Kaplan-Meier method resulted in the most biased results and overestimated probabilities for the primary outcome in analyses of hospital data from COVID-19 patients. This overestimation could mislead clinical decision-making. Both immortal-time bias and confounding bias must be addressed in assessments of treatment effectiveness. The trial emulation framework offers a potential solution to address all three methodological biases.
| S-EPMC10991758 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWe aimed to use setting-appropriate comparisons to estimate the effects of different gastrointestinal (GI) prophylaxis pharmacotherapies for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and setting-inappropriate comparisons to illustrate how improper design choices could result in biased results.Study design and settingWe identified 3,804 hospitalized patients aged ≥ 18 years with COVID-19 from March to November 2020. We compared the effects of different gastroprotective agents on clinical improvement of COVID-19, as measured by a published severity scale. We used propensity score-based fine-stratification for confounding adjustment. Based on guidelines, we prespecified comparisons between agents with clinical equipoise and inappropriate comparisons of users vs. nonusers of GI prophylaxis in the intensive care unit (ICU).ResultsNo benefit was detected when comparing oral famotidine to omeprazole in patients treated in the general ward or ICUs. We also found no associations when comparing intravenous famotidine to intravenous pantoprazole. For inappropriate comparisons of users vs. nonusers in the ICU, the probability of improvement was reduced by 32%-45% in famotidine users and 21%-48% in omeprazole or pantoprazole users.ConclusionWe found no evidence that GI prophylaxis improved outcomes for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in setting-appropriate comparisons. An improper comparator choice can lead to spurious associations in critically ill patients.
| S-EPMC9296251 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Action-outcome contingencies can be learnt either by active trial-and-error, or vicariously, by observing the outcomes of actions performed by others. The extant literature is ambiguous as to which of these modes of learning is more effective, as controlled comparisons of operant and observational learning are rare. Here, we contrasted human operant and observational value learning, assessing implicit and explicit measures of learning from positive and negative reinforcement. Compared to direct operant learning, we show observational learning is associated with an optimistic over-valuation of low-value options, a pattern apparent both in participants' choice preferences and their explicit post-hoc estimates of value. Learning of higher value options showed no such bias. We suggest that such a bias can be explained as a tendency for optimistic underestimation of the chance of experiencing negative events, an optimism repressed when information is gathered through direct operant learning.
| S-EPMC3081069 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine seroprotection rates with conventional aluminum adjuvanted recombinant HBV vaccines, Engerix-B (HepB-alum) vaccine, among people with HIV (PWH) are varied. Heplisav-B (HepB-CpG) vaccine, a novel adjuvanted recombinant HBV vaccine, has shown higher seroprotection rates in immunocompetent patients but is not well studied in PWH. There are no published studies comparing seroprotection rates between HepB-alum and HepB-CpG in PWH. This study aims to evaluate and compare the seroprotection incidence of HepB-alum vs HepB-CpG in PWH at least 18 years of age.MethodsThis retrospective, observational cohort study included adults diagnosed with HIV who received a complete series of HepB-alum or HepB-CpG at a community health center in Phoenix, Arizona. Patients had a hepatitis B surface antibody <10 IU/L at the time of the first vaccine dose. The primary outcome was a comparison of seroconversion incidence between HepB-CpG and HepB-alum. Secondary outcomes included identifying factors associated with likelihood of response to HBV vaccination.ResultsA total of 120 patients were included in this study, 59 in the HepB-alum cohort and 61 in the HepB-CpG cohort. In the HepB-alum cohort, 57.6% achieved seroconversion, compared with 93.4% in the HepB-CpG cohort (P < .001). Those without diabetes were more likely to have response to a vaccine.ConclusionsAmong PWH at a single community health center, HepB-CpG provided a statistically higher incidence of seroprotection against HBV compared with HepB-alum.
| S-EPMC10300634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOn March 9, 2020, the first COVID-19 case was reported in Jodhpur, Rajasthan, in the northwestern part of India. Understanding the epidemiology of COVID-19 at a local level is becoming increasingly important to guide measures to control the pandemic.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to estimate the serial interval and basic reproduction number (R0) to understand the transmission dynamics of the COVID-19 outbreak at a district level. We used standard mathematical modeling approaches to assess the utility of these factors in determining the effectiveness of COVID-19 responses and projecting the size of the epidemic.MethodsContact tracing of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 was performed to obtain the serial intervals. The median and 95th percentile values of the SARS-CoV-2 serial interval were obtained from the best fits with the weibull, log-normal, log-logistic, gamma, and generalized gamma distributions. Aggregate and instantaneous R0 values were derived with different methods using the EarlyR and EpiEstim packages in R software.ResultsThe median and 95th percentile values of the serial interval were 5.23 days (95% CI 4.72-5.79) and 13.20 days (95% CI 10.90-18.18), respectively. R0 during the first 30 days of the outbreak was 1.62 (95% CI 1.07-2.17), which subsequently decreased to 1.15 (95% CI 1.09-1.21). The peak instantaneous R0 values obtained using a Poisson process developed by Jombert et al were 6.53 (95% CI 2.12-13.38) and 3.43 (95% CI 1.71-5.74) for sliding time windows of 7 and 14 days, respectively. The peak R0 values obtained using the method by Wallinga and Teunis were 2.96 (95% CI 2.52-3.36) and 2.92 (95% CI 2.65-3.22) for sliding time windows of 7 and 14 days, respectively. R0 values of 1.21 (95% CI 1.09-1.34) and 1.12 (95% CI 1.03-1.21) for the 7- and 14-day sliding time windows, respectively, were obtained on July 6, 2020, using method by Jombert et al. Using the method by Wallinga and Teunis, values of 0.32 (95% CI 0.27-0.36) and 0.61 (95% CI 0.58-0.63) were obtained for the 7- and 14-day sliding time windows, respectively. The projection of cases over the next month was 2131 (95% CI 1799-2462). Reductions of transmission by 25% and 50% corresponding to reasonable and aggressive control measures could lead to 58.7% and 84.0% reductions in epidemic size, respectively.ConclusionsThe projected transmission reductions indicate that strengthening control measures could lead to proportionate reductions of the size of the COVID-19 epidemic. Time-dependent instantaneous R0 estimation based on the process by Jombart et al was found to be better suited for guiding COVID-19 response at the district level than overall R0 or instantaneous R0 estimation by the Wallinga and Teunis method. A data-driven approach at the local level is proposed to be useful in guiding public health strategy and surge capacity planning.
| S-EPMC7572116 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Using imperfect tests may lead to biased estimates of disease frequency and measures of association. Many studies have looked into the effect of misclassification on statistical inferences. These evaluations were either within a cross-sectional study framework, assessing biased prevalence, or for cohort study designs, evaluating biased incidence rate or risk ratio estimates based on misclassification at one of the two time-points (initial assessment or follow-up). However, both observations at risk and incident cases can be wrongly identified in longitudinal studies, leading to selection and misclassification biases, respectively. The objective of this paper was to evaluate the relative impact of selection and misclassification biases resulting from misclassification, together, on measures of incidence and risk ratio. To investigate impact on measure of disease frequency, data sets from a hypothetical cohort study with two samples collected one month apart were simulated and analyzed based on specific test and disease characteristics, with no elimination of disease during the sampling interval or clustering of observations. Direction and magnitude of bias due to selection, misclassification, and total bias was assessed for diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity ranging from 0.7 to 1.0 and 0.8 to 1.0, respectively, and for specific disease contexts, i.e., disease prevalences of 5 and 20%, and disease incidences of 0.01, 0.05, and 0.1 cases/animal-month. A hypothetical exposure with known strength of association was also generated. A total of 1,000 cohort studies of 1,000 observations each were simulated for these six disease contexts where the same diagnostic test was used to identify observations at risk at beginning of the cohort and incident cases at its end. Our results indicated that the departure of the estimates of disease incidence and risk ratio from their true value were mainly a function of test specificity, and disease prevalence and incidence. The combination of the two biases, at baseline and follow-up, revealed the importance of a good to excellent specificity relative to sensitivity for the diagnostic test. Small divergence from perfect specificity extended quickly to disease incidence over-estimation as true prevalence increased and true incidence decreased. A highly sensitive test to exclude diseased subjects at baseline was of less importance to minimize bias than using a highly specific one at baseline. Near perfect diagnostic test attributes were even more important to obtain a measure of association close to the true risk ratio, according to specific disease characteristics, especially its prevalence. Low prevalent and high incident disease lead to minimal bias if disease is diagnosed with high sensitivity and close to perfect specificity at baseline and follow-up. For more prevalent diseases we observed large risk ratio biases towards the null value, even with near perfect diagnosis.
| S-EPMC5985700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOngoing tetanus cases and sporadic outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases associated with routine vaccination programmes remain problems in many low and middle-income countries, including Vietnam. With no human-to-human transmission or natural immunity, tetanus antibody levels indicate both individual risk of tetanus and gaps in vaccination programmes.MethodsTo investigate gaps in immunity to tetanus in Vietnam, a country with a historically high level of tetanus vaccination coverage, tetanus antibodies were measure by ELISA from samples selected from a long-term serum bank, established for the purposes of general-population seroepidemiological investigations in southern Vietnam. Samples were selected from 10 provinces, focussing on age-groups targeted by national vaccination programmes for infants and pregnant women (Expanded Programme on Immunization, EPI, and Maternal and Neonatal Tetanus, MNT).ResultsAntibodies were measured from a total of 3864 samples. Highest tetanus antibody concentrations occurred in children under 4 years old, over 90 % of whom had protective levels. Approximately 70 % of children aged 7-12 years had protective antibody concentrations although there was variation among provinces. For infants and children, there were no significant differences in tetanus protection between males and females, but for adults aged 20-35 years, in five of the ten provinces surveyed, protection against tetanus was higher in females (p < 0.05) who are eligible for booster doses under the MNT programme. In seven of ten provinces, antibody concentrations were inversely related to age (p < 0.01) and protection of older individuals was generally low.ConclusionWidespread immunity to tetanus toxoid is seen in infants and young children consistent with the high coverage rates reported for diptheria tetanus toxoid and pertussis (DTP) in Vietnam. However, the lower antibody concentrations seen in older children and men suggest reduced immunity to tetanus in populations not targeted by EPI and MNT programmes.
| S-EPMC10580288 | biostudies-literature
Project description:For sexually transmitted infections like HIV to propagate through a population, there must be a path linking susceptible cases to currently infectious cases. The existence of such paths depends in part on the degree distribution. Here, we use simulation methods to examine how two features of the degree distribution affect network connectivity: Mean degree captures a volume dimension, while the skewness of the upper tail captures a shape dimension. We find a clear interaction between shape and volume: When mean degree is low, connectivity is greater for long-tailed distributions, but at higher mean degree, connectivity is greater in short-tailed distributions. The phase transition to a giant component and giant bicomponent emerges as a positive function of volume, but it rises more sharply and ultimately reaches more people in short-tail distributions than in long-tail distributions. These findings suggest that any interventions should be attuned to how practices affect both the volume and shape of the degree distribution, noting potential unanticipated effects. For example, policies that primarily affect high-volume nodes may not be effective if they simply redistribute volume among lower degree actors, which appears to exacerbate underlying network connectivity.
| S-EPMC5809000 | biostudies-other
Project description:In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, public health scientists have produced a large and rapidly expanding body of literature that aims to answer critical questions, such as the proportion of the population in a geographic area that has been infected; the transmissibility of the virus and factors associated with high infectiousness or susceptibility to infection; which groups are the most at risk of infection, morbidity and mortality; and the degree to which antibodies confer protection to re-infection. Observational studies are subject to a number of different biases, including confounding, selection bias, and measurement error, that may threaten their validity or influence the interpretation of their results. To assist in the critical evaluation of a vast body of literature and contribute to future study design, we outline and propose solutions to biases that can occur across different categories of observational studies of COVID-19. We consider potential biases that could occur in five categories of studies: (1) cross-sectional seroprevalence, (2) longitudinal seroprotection, (3) risk factor studies to inform interventions, (4) studies to estimate the secondary attack rate, and (5) studies that use secondary attack rates to make inferences about infectiousness and susceptibility.
| S-EPMC7906244 | biostudies-literature