公共卫生群众运动的评价:犹豫和事件比率法

{"title":"公共卫生群众运动的评价:犹豫和事件比率法","authors":"","doi":"10.33140/mcr.05.09.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Several public health interventions administer drugs and vaccines to large number of people for preemptive or reactive intervention. These vaccines and drugs were developed in very narrow conditions in clinical trials and we therefore have to continuously monitor the efficacy in the field. This paper proposes a method to evaluate the efficacy in the field using data collected from the intervention coverage survey and surveillance. The design is closely related to cohort prospective studies except that the sample size is not fixed upfront and the measure of association not affected by the population denominator. It uses two new terms: hesitancy ratio denoted β, which is the ratio of the target that does to receive the intervention to the target that received it; event ratio is denoted by α is the ratio of health event or disease being prevented absolute incidence in the intervention group to that is in control group. It further shows that risk ratio (RR) can be calculated from these two parameters by taking their products. i.e. RR = α β. This method is therefore called Hesitancy and Event Ratios (HER) Method. We can conclude that this method is scientifically sound and can be used in the evaluation of public health intervention in the field. We recommend that this method be included in routine monitoring of programs for efficacy evaluation.","PeriodicalId":186238,"journal":{"name":"Medical & Clinical Research","volume":"383 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Public Health Mass Campaign: Hesitancy and Event Ratios Method\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.33140/mcr.05.09.02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Several public health interventions administer drugs and vaccines to large number of people for preemptive or reactive intervention. These vaccines and drugs were developed in very narrow conditions in clinical trials and we therefore have to continuously monitor the efficacy in the field. This paper proposes a method to evaluate the efficacy in the field using data collected from the intervention coverage survey and surveillance. The design is closely related to cohort prospective studies except that the sample size is not fixed upfront and the measure of association not affected by the population denominator. It uses two new terms: hesitancy ratio denoted β, which is the ratio of the target that does to receive the intervention to the target that received it; event ratio is denoted by α is the ratio of health event or disease being prevented absolute incidence in the intervention group to that is in control group. It further shows that risk ratio (RR) can be calculated from these two parameters by taking their products. i.e. RR = α β. This method is therefore called Hesitancy and Event Ratios (HER) Method. We can conclude that this method is scientifically sound and can be used in the evaluation of public health intervention in the field. We recommend that this method be included in routine monitoring of programs for efficacy evaluation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":186238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical & Clinical Research\",\"volume\":\"383 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical & Clinical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33140/mcr.05.09.02\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical & Clinical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33140/mcr.05.09.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一些公共卫生干预措施为大量人群提供药物和疫苗,以进行先发制人或被动干预。这些疫苗和药物是在非常狭窄的临床试验条件下研制的,因此我们必须不断监测实地的疗效。本文提出了一种利用从干预覆盖调查和监测中收集的数据来评估实地效果的方法。该设计与队列前瞻性研究密切相关,只是样本量不是预先固定的,关联度量不受总体分母的影响。它使用了两个新术语:犹豫比率(β),表示不接受干预的目标与接受干预的目标的比率;事件比用α表示,为干预组预防的健康事件或疾病的绝对发生率与对照组的比率。进一步表明,可以通过取这两个参数的乘积来计算风险比(RR)。即RR = α β。因此,这种方法被称为犹豫和事件比率(HER)方法。我们可以得出结论,该方法在科学上是合理的,可用于现场公共卫生干预的评价。我们建议将这种方法纳入疗效评估项目的常规监测中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Public Health Mass Campaign: Hesitancy and Event Ratios Method
Several public health interventions administer drugs and vaccines to large number of people for preemptive or reactive intervention. These vaccines and drugs were developed in very narrow conditions in clinical trials and we therefore have to continuously monitor the efficacy in the field. This paper proposes a method to evaluate the efficacy in the field using data collected from the intervention coverage survey and surveillance. The design is closely related to cohort prospective studies except that the sample size is not fixed upfront and the measure of association not affected by the population denominator. It uses two new terms: hesitancy ratio denoted β, which is the ratio of the target that does to receive the intervention to the target that received it; event ratio is denoted by α is the ratio of health event or disease being prevented absolute incidence in the intervention group to that is in control group. It further shows that risk ratio (RR) can be calculated from these two parameters by taking their products. i.e. RR = α β. This method is therefore called Hesitancy and Event Ratios (HER) Method. We can conclude that this method is scientifically sound and can be used in the evaluation of public health intervention in the field. We recommend that this method be included in routine monitoring of programs for efficacy evaluation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信