IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0041785.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Assessment of the Screening Method to Evaluate Vaccine Effectiveness: The Case of 7-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Adam L Cohen
  • Thomas Taylor Jr
  • Monica M Farley
  • William Schaffner
  • Lindsey J Lesher
  • Kenneth A Gershman
  • Nancy M Bennett
  • Arthur Reingold
  • Ann Thomas
  • Joan Baumbach
  • Lee H Harrison
  • Susan Petit
  • Bernard Beall
  • Elizabeth Zell
  • Matthew Moore

Abstract

The screening method, which employs readily available data, is an inexpensive and quick means of estimating vaccine effectiveness (VE). We compared estimates of effectiveness of heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) against invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) using the screening and case-control methods. Cases were children aged 19–35 months with pneumococcus isolated from normally sterile sites residing in Active Bacterial Core surveillance areas in the United States. Case-control VE was estimated for 2001–2004 by comparing the odds of vaccination among cases and community controls. Screening-method VE for 2001–2009 was estimated by comparing the proportion of cases vaccinated to National Immunization Survey-derived coverage among the general population. To evaluate the plausibility of screening-method VE findings, we estimated attack rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated persons. We identified 1,154 children with IPD. Annual population PCV7 coverage with ≥1 dose increased from 38% to 97%. Case-control VE for ≥1 dose was estimated as 75% against all-serotype IPD (annual range: 35–83%) and 91% for PCV7-type IPD (annual range: 65–100%). By the screening method, the overall VE was 86% for ≥1 dose (annual range: −240–70%) against all-serotype IPD and 94% (annual range: 62–97%) against PCV7-type IPD. As cases of PCV7-type IPD declined during 2001–2005, estimated attack rates for all-serotype IPD among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals became less consistent than what would be expected with the estimated effectiveness of PCV7. The screening method yields estimates of VE that are highly dependent on the time period during which it is used and the choice of outcome. The method should be used cautiously to evaluate VE of PCVs.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam L Cohen & Thomas Taylor Jr & Monica M Farley & William Schaffner & Lindsey J Lesher & Kenneth A Gershman & Nancy M Bennett & Arthur Reingold & Ann Thomas & Joan Baumbach & Lee H Harrison & Susan , 2012. "An Assessment of the Screening Method to Evaluate Vaccine Effectiveness: The Case of 7-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-7, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0041785
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0041785
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0041785&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0041785?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0041785. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.