COVID-19疫苗接种的定量获益-风险评估:一项系统综述

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
E Claire Newbern, Lea Wildisen, Rita Verstraeten, Corinne Willame, Kevin Haynes, Bennett Levitan, Nicolas Praet
{"title":"COVID-19疫苗接种的定量获益-风险评估:一项系统综述","authors":"E Claire Newbern, Lea Wildisen, Rita Verstraeten, Corinne Willame, Kevin Haynes, Bennett Levitan, Nicolas Praet","doi":"10.1002/pds.70099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines, there has been a proliferation of quantitative benefit-risk assessments (qBRAs). Prior work on other types of vaccines has found that published qBRAs have not always clearly reported methods and/or results needed to assist in the application of the qBRA findings. The aim was to systematically identify, review, and critically assess published COVID-19 vaccine qBRA. The ultimate goal is to support the future development of robust qBRA for existing, new, and updated vaccines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically reviewed COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs identified from multiple sources through April 17, 2023, including literature databases, selected Health Authority websites, and a grey literature search. We critically assessed whether key features typical of qBRA were presented in these reports.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 37 COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs from screening 2220 publications and 18 other sources. The qBRAs were conducted on two mRNA and two adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccines. Only one qBRA represented low- and middle-income countries. Although many qBRAs used simple calculations (n = 25), more complex models were presented in 15 reports. Simple approaches were able to employ stratification by age and/or sex to highlight safety issues affecting specific demographic groups and scenarios to account for changes in viral transmission and vaccine effectiveness over time. Details regarding data sources and analytic methods were missing or limited in some reports.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This comprehensive description and critical assessment of COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs together with available guidance can be used to support the development of robust and transparent future vaccine qBRAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 2","pages":"e70099"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11779546/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment of Vaccination Against COVID-19: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"E Claire Newbern, Lea Wildisen, Rita Verstraeten, Corinne Willame, Kevin Haynes, Bennett Levitan, Nicolas Praet\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.70099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines, there has been a proliferation of quantitative benefit-risk assessments (qBRAs). Prior work on other types of vaccines has found that published qBRAs have not always clearly reported methods and/or results needed to assist in the application of the qBRA findings. The aim was to systematically identify, review, and critically assess published COVID-19 vaccine qBRA. The ultimate goal is to support the future development of robust qBRA for existing, new, and updated vaccines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically reviewed COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs identified from multiple sources through April 17, 2023, including literature databases, selected Health Authority websites, and a grey literature search. We critically assessed whether key features typical of qBRA were presented in these reports.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 37 COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs from screening 2220 publications and 18 other sources. The qBRAs were conducted on two mRNA and two adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccines. Only one qBRA represented low- and middle-income countries. Although many qBRAs used simple calculations (n = 25), more complex models were presented in 15 reports. Simple approaches were able to employ stratification by age and/or sex to highlight safety issues affecting specific demographic groups and scenarios to account for changes in viral transmission and vaccine effectiveness over time. Details regarding data sources and analytic methods were missing or limited in some reports.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This comprehensive description and critical assessment of COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs together with available guidance can be used to support the development of robust and transparent future vaccine qBRAs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"e70099\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11779546/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70099\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70099","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:随着COVID-19疫苗的引入,定量获益-风险评估(qBRAs)得到了广泛应用。先前关于其他类型疫苗的工作发现,已发表的qBRA并不总是清楚地报告有助于应用qBRA结果所需的方法和/或结果。目的是系统地识别、审查和严格评估已发表的COVID-19疫苗qBRA。最终目标是支持现有疫苗、新疫苗和更新疫苗的强大qBRA的未来发展。方法:我们系统地回顾了截至2023年4月17日从多个来源鉴定的COVID-19疫苗qbra,包括文献数据库、选定的卫生当局网站和灰色文献检索。我们批判性地评估了这些报告中是否呈现了qBRA的典型特征。结果:我们从筛选的2220份出版物和18个其他来源中鉴定出37个COVID-19疫苗qbra。在两种mRNA和两种腺病毒载体COVID-19疫苗上进行qBRAs。只有一个qBRA代表低收入和中等收入国家。虽然许多qbra使用了简单的计算(n = 25),但在15份报告中提出了更复杂的模型。简单的方法能够采用年龄和/或性别分层,以突出影响特定人口群体和情景的安全问题,以解释病毒传播和疫苗有效性随时间的变化。一些报告缺少或限制了关于数据来源和分析方法的细节。结论:对COVID-19疫苗qbra的全面描述和批判性评估以及现有指南可用于支持开发稳健和透明的未来疫苗qbra。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment of Vaccination Against COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

Purpose: With the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines, there has been a proliferation of quantitative benefit-risk assessments (qBRAs). Prior work on other types of vaccines has found that published qBRAs have not always clearly reported methods and/or results needed to assist in the application of the qBRA findings. The aim was to systematically identify, review, and critically assess published COVID-19 vaccine qBRA. The ultimate goal is to support the future development of robust qBRA for existing, new, and updated vaccines.

Methods: We systematically reviewed COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs identified from multiple sources through April 17, 2023, including literature databases, selected Health Authority websites, and a grey literature search. We critically assessed whether key features typical of qBRA were presented in these reports.

Results: We identified 37 COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs from screening 2220 publications and 18 other sources. The qBRAs were conducted on two mRNA and two adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccines. Only one qBRA represented low- and middle-income countries. Although many qBRAs used simple calculations (n = 25), more complex models were presented in 15 reports. Simple approaches were able to employ stratification by age and/or sex to highlight safety issues affecting specific demographic groups and scenarios to account for changes in viral transmission and vaccine effectiveness over time. Details regarding data sources and analytic methods were missing or limited in some reports.

Conclusions: This comprehensive description and critical assessment of COVID-19 vaccine qBRAs together with available guidance can be used to support the development of robust and transparent future vaccine qBRAs.

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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
×
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