Validity of influenza vaccine effectiveness calculations using a test-negative design in Thailand.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Erica E Zeno, Prabda Praphasiri, Wichan Bhunyakitikorn, Sutthichai Nakphook, Darunee Ditsungnoen, Wuttiphong Phakdeekul, Passakorn Ongarj, Ratchadaporn Ungcharoen, Warinmad Kedthongma, Seesai Yeesoonsang, Kanlaya Sornwong, Chaninan Sonthichai, Anna N Chard, William W Davis, Martha P Montgomery, Kriengkrai Prasert
{"title":"Validity of influenza vaccine effectiveness calculations using a test-negative design in Thailand.","authors":"Erica E Zeno, Prabda Praphasiri, Wichan Bhunyakitikorn, Sutthichai Nakphook, Darunee Ditsungnoen, Wuttiphong Phakdeekul, Passakorn Ongarj, Ratchadaporn Ungcharoen, Warinmad Kedthongma, Seesai Yeesoonsang, Kanlaya Sornwong, Chaninan Sonthichai, Anna N Chard, William W Davis, Martha P Montgomery, Kriengkrai Prasert","doi":"10.1093/aje/kwag094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Thailand uses a test-negative design to calculate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) annually for the Southern Hemisphere formulation and shares estimates with the World Health Organization to inform global vaccine strain selection. This study analyzed potential misclassification and confounding factors to evaluate validity of the test-negative design in Thailand. We retrospectively reviewed influenza sentinel surveillance data from June 2023 to May 2024 and gathered information on vaccination history and health-seeking behavior. Cases were medically attended illnesses with positive influenza test results; noncases had negative results for influenza and SARS-CoV-2. We compared VE using the routine approach with six scenarios, representing four potential threats to the validity of test-negative design studies. We assessed exposure (vaccination) misclassification, outcome (influenza) misclassification, and confounding by health-seeking behavior. Unmeasured confounding was evaluated by calculating VE against rhinovirus, an outcome unrelated to influenza vaccination. A total of 4709 patients were included, of which 328 (7.0%) were vaccinated against influenza. Under the routine approach, VE against medically attended influenza was 36.9% (95% CI, 13.5%-53.9%). In alternative scenarios, VE ranged from 32.4% to 42.8%, with overlapping 95% CIs. These findings support the validity of Thailand's VE estimates and can inform improvements in surveillance procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":7472,"journal":{"name":"American journal of epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"2423-2429"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13537842/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwag094","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Thailand uses a test-negative design to calculate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) annually for the Southern Hemisphere formulation and shares estimates with the World Health Organization to inform global vaccine strain selection. This study analyzed potential misclassification and confounding factors to evaluate validity of the test-negative design in Thailand. We retrospectively reviewed influenza sentinel surveillance data from June 2023 to May 2024 and gathered information on vaccination history and health-seeking behavior. Cases were medically attended illnesses with positive influenza test results; noncases had negative results for influenza and SARS-CoV-2. We compared VE using the routine approach with six scenarios, representing four potential threats to the validity of test-negative design studies. We assessed exposure (vaccination) misclassification, outcome (influenza) misclassification, and confounding by health-seeking behavior. Unmeasured confounding was evaluated by calculating VE against rhinovirus, an outcome unrelated to influenza vaccination. A total of 4709 patients were included, of which 328 (7.0%) were vaccinated against influenza. Under the routine approach, VE against medically attended influenza was 36.9% (95% CI, 13.5%-53.9%). In alternative scenarios, VE ranged from 32.4% to 42.8%, with overlapping 95% CIs. These findings support the validity of Thailand's VE estimates and can inform improvements in surveillance procedures.

泰国采用阴性试验设计的流感疫苗有效性计算的有效性。
泰国采用阴性试验设计每年计算南半球配方的流感疫苗有效性(VE),并与世界卫生组织共享估计结果,为全球疫苗株选择提供信息。本研究分析潜在的误分类和混杂因素,以评估泰国阴性试验设计的效度。我们回顾性地回顾了2023年6月至2024年5月的流感哨点监测数据,并收集了疫苗接种史和求医行为的信息。病例为流感检测结果呈阳性的就诊病例;非病例流感和SARS-CoV-2检测结果为阴性。我们比较了使用常规方法的VE与六种情况,代表了对阴性试验设计研究有效性的四种潜在威胁。我们评估了暴露(疫苗接种)错误分类,结果(流感)错误分类,以及就诊行为的混淆。通过计算抗鼻病毒的VE(与流感疫苗接种无关的结果)来评估未测量的混杂。共纳入4709例患者,其中328例(7.0%)接种了流感疫苗。在常规方法下,医疗护理流感的VE为36.9%(95%可信区间:13.5%,53.9%)。在其他情况下,VE范围从32.4%到42.8%,95%置信区间重叠。这些发现支持了泰国的VE估计的有效性,并可为改进监测程序提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of epidemiology
American journal of epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
221
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Epidemiology is the oldest and one of the premier epidemiologic journals devoted to the publication of empirical research findings, opinion pieces, and methodological developments in the field of epidemiologic research. It is a peer-reviewed journal aimed at both fellow epidemiologists and those who use epidemiologic data, including public health workers and clinicians.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书