Sophie Graham, Jemma L Walker, Nick Andrews, William J Hulme, Dorothea Nitsch, Edward P K Parker, Helen I McDonald
{"title":"在观察性研究中量化和调整求医行为与医疗服务获取的混杂因素。","authors":"Sophie Graham, Jemma L Walker, Nick Andrews, William J Hulme, Dorothea Nitsch, Edward P K Parker, Helen I McDonald","doi":"10.1093/ofid/ofae598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health-seeking behavior and health care access (HSB/HCA) are recognized confounders in many observational studies but are not directly measurable in electronic health records. We used proxy markers of HSB/HCA to quantify and adjust for confounding in observational studies of influenza and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study used primary care data prelinked to secondary care and death data in England. We included individuals aged ≥66 years on 1 September 2019 and assessed influenza VE in the 2019-2020 season and early COVID-19 VE (December 2020-March 2021). VE was estimated with sequential adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and 14 markers of HSB/HCA. Influenza vaccination in the 2019-2020 season was also considered a negative control exposure against COVID-19 before COVID-19 vaccine rollout.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 1 991 284, 1 796 667, and 1 946 943 individuals in the influenza, COVID-19, and negative control exposure populations, respectively. Markers of HSB/HCA were positively correlated with influenza and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. For influenza, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers in addition to demographics and comorbidities increased VE against influenza-like illness from -1.5% (95% CI, -3.2% to .1%) to 7.1% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.7%) with a less apparent trend for more severe outcomes. For COVID-19, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers did not change VE estimates against infection or severe disease (eg, 2 doses of BNT162b2 against infection: 82.8% [95% CI, 78.4%-86.3%] to 83.1% [95% CI, 78.7%-86.5%]). Adjusting for HSB/HCA markers removed bias in the negative control exposure analysis (-7.5% [95% CI, -10.6% to -4.5%] vs -2.1% [95% CI, -6.0% to 1.7%] before vs after adjusting for HSB/HCA markers).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Markers of HSB/HCA can be used to quantify and account for confounding in observational vaccine studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":19517,"journal":{"name":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","volume":"11 10","pages":"ofae598"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11518854/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quantifying and Adjusting for Confounding From Health-Seeking Behavior and Health Care Access in Observational Research.\",\"authors\":\"Sophie Graham, Jemma L Walker, Nick Andrews, William J Hulme, Dorothea Nitsch, Edward P K Parker, Helen I McDonald\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ofid/ofae598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health-seeking behavior and health care access (HSB/HCA) are recognized confounders in many observational studies but are not directly measurable in electronic health records. We used proxy markers of HSB/HCA to quantify and adjust for confounding in observational studies of influenza and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study used primary care data prelinked to secondary care and death data in England. We included individuals aged ≥66 years on 1 September 2019 and assessed influenza VE in the 2019-2020 season and early COVID-19 VE (December 2020-March 2021). VE was estimated with sequential adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and 14 markers of HSB/HCA. Influenza vaccination in the 2019-2020 season was also considered a negative control exposure against COVID-19 before COVID-19 vaccine rollout.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 1 991 284, 1 796 667, and 1 946 943 individuals in the influenza, COVID-19, and negative control exposure populations, respectively. Markers of HSB/HCA were positively correlated with influenza and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. For influenza, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers in addition to demographics and comorbidities increased VE against influenza-like illness from -1.5% (95% CI, -3.2% to .1%) to 7.1% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.7%) with a less apparent trend for more severe outcomes. For COVID-19, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers did not change VE estimates against infection or severe disease (eg, 2 doses of BNT162b2 against infection: 82.8% [95% CI, 78.4%-86.3%] to 83.1% [95% CI, 78.7%-86.5%]). Adjusting for HSB/HCA markers removed bias in the negative control exposure analysis (-7.5% [95% CI, -10.6% to -4.5%] vs -2.1% [95% CI, -6.0% to 1.7%] before vs after adjusting for HSB/HCA markers).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Markers of HSB/HCA can be used to quantify and account for confounding in observational vaccine studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Forum Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\"11 10\",\"pages\":\"ofae598\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11518854/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Forum Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae598\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae598","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quantifying and Adjusting for Confounding From Health-Seeking Behavior and Health Care Access in Observational Research.
Background: Health-seeking behavior and health care access (HSB/HCA) are recognized confounders in many observational studies but are not directly measurable in electronic health records. We used proxy markers of HSB/HCA to quantify and adjust for confounding in observational studies of influenza and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE).
Methods: This cohort study used primary care data prelinked to secondary care and death data in England. We included individuals aged ≥66 years on 1 September 2019 and assessed influenza VE in the 2019-2020 season and early COVID-19 VE (December 2020-March 2021). VE was estimated with sequential adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and 14 markers of HSB/HCA. Influenza vaccination in the 2019-2020 season was also considered a negative control exposure against COVID-19 before COVID-19 vaccine rollout.
Results: We included 1 991 284, 1 796 667, and 1 946 943 individuals in the influenza, COVID-19, and negative control exposure populations, respectively. Markers of HSB/HCA were positively correlated with influenza and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. For influenza, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers in addition to demographics and comorbidities increased VE against influenza-like illness from -1.5% (95% CI, -3.2% to .1%) to 7.1% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.7%) with a less apparent trend for more severe outcomes. For COVID-19, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers did not change VE estimates against infection or severe disease (eg, 2 doses of BNT162b2 against infection: 82.8% [95% CI, 78.4%-86.3%] to 83.1% [95% CI, 78.7%-86.5%]). Adjusting for HSB/HCA markers removed bias in the negative control exposure analysis (-7.5% [95% CI, -10.6% to -4.5%] vs -2.1% [95% CI, -6.0% to 1.7%] before vs after adjusting for HSB/HCA markers).
Conclusions: Markers of HSB/HCA can be used to quantify and account for confounding in observational vaccine studies.
期刊介绍:
Open Forum Infectious Diseases provides a global forum for the publication of clinical, translational, and basic research findings in a fully open access, online journal environment. The journal reflects the broad diversity of the field of infectious diseases, and focuses on the intersection of biomedical science and clinical practice, with a particular emphasis on knowledge that holds the potential to improve patient care in populations around the world. Fully peer-reviewed, OFID supports the international community of infectious diseases experts by providing a venue for articles that further the understanding of all aspects of infectious diseases.