Literature DB >> 15071280

Understanding vaccine safety information from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

Frederick Varricchio1, John Iskander, Frank Destefano, Robert Ball, Robert Pless, M Miles Braun, Robert T Chen.   

Abstract

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is administered by the Food and Drug Administration and CDC and is a key component of postlicensure vaccine safety surveillance. Its primary function is to detect early warning signals and generate hypotheses about possible new vaccine adverse events or changes in frequency of known ones. VAERS is a passive surveillance system that relies on physicians and others to voluntarily submit reports of illness after vaccination. Manufacturers are required to report all adverse events of which they become aware. There are a number of well-described limitations of such reporting systems. These include, for example, variability in report quality, biased reporting, underreporting and the inability to determine whether a vaccine caused the adverse event in any individual report. Strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and timely. The information in VAERS reports is not necessarily complete nor is it verified systematically. Reports are classified as serious or nonserious based on regulatory criteria. Reports are coded by VAERS in a uniform way with a limited number of terms using a terminology called COSTART. Coding is useful for search purposes but is necessarily imprecise. VAERS is useful in detecting adverse events related to vaccines and most recently was used for enhanced reporting of adverse events in the national smallpox immunization campaign. VAERS data have always been publicly available. However, it is essential for users of VAERS data to be fully aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the system. VAERS data contain strong biases. Incidence rates and relative risks of specific adverse events cannot be calculated. Statistical significance tests and confidence intervals should be used with great caution and not routinely. Signals detected in VAERS should be subjected to further clinical and descriptive epidemiologic analysis. Confirmation in a controlled study is usually required. An understanding of the system's defined objectives and inherent drawbacks is vital to the effective use of VAERS data in vaccine safety investigations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15071280     DOI: 10.1097/00006454-200404000-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Infect Dis J        ISSN: 0891-3668            Impact factor:   2.129


  86 in total

Review 1.  Perspectives on the use of data mining in pharmaco-vigilance.

Authors:  June Almenoff; Joseph M Tonning; A Lawrence Gould; Ana Szarfman; Manfred Hauben; Rita Ouellet-Hellstrom; Robert Ball; Ken Hornbuckle; Louisa Walsh; Chuen Yee; Susan T Sacks; Nancy Yuen; Vaishali Patadia; Michael Blum; Mike Johnston; Charles Gerrits; Harry Seifert; Karol Lacroix
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 5.606

2.  Effects of stratification on data mining in the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Authors:  Emily Jane Woo; Robert Ball; Dale R Burwen; M Miles Braun
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Guillain-Barre syndrome following quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccination among vaccine-eligible individuals in the United States.

Authors:  Rohit P Ojha; Bradford E Jackson; Joseph E Tota; Tabatha N Offutt-Powell; Karan P Singh; Sejong Bae
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Innovative Digital Tools and Surveillance Systems for the Timely Detection of Adverse Events at the Point of Care: A Proof-of-Concept Study.

Authors:  Christian Hoppe; Patrick Obermeier; Susann Muehlhans; Maren Alchikh; Lea Seeber; Franziska Tief; Katharina Karsch; Xi Chen; Sindy Boettcher; Sabine Diedrich; Tim Conrad; Bron Kisler; Barbara Rath
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.606

5.  Ischemic cardiac events and other adverse events following ACAM2000(®) smallpox vaccine in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

Authors:  Michael M McNeil; Maria Cano; Elaine R Miller; Brett W Petersen; Renata J M Engler; Marthe G Bryant-Genevier
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 3.641

6.  Erythema multiforme, Stevens Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis reported after vaccination, 1999-2017.

Authors:  John R Su; Penina Haber; Carmen S Ng; Paige L Marquez; Graça M Dores; Silvia Perez-Vilar; Maria V Cano
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 3.641

7.  An evaluation of the feasibility and usability of a proof of concept mobile app for adverse event reporting post influenza vaccination.

Authors:  Kumanan Wilson; Katherine M Atkinson; Jacqueline Westeinde; Cameron Bell; Kim Marty; Dean Fergusson; Shelley L Deeks; Natasha Crowcroft; Julie A Bettinger
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 8.  Deaths following vaccination: What does the evidence show?

Authors:  Elaine R Miller; Pedro L Moro; Maria Cano; Tom T Shimabukuro
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2015-05-23       Impact factor: 3.641

9.  Text mining for the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System: medical text classification using informative feature selection.

Authors:  Taxiarchis Botsis; Michael D Nguyen; Emily Jane Woo; Marianthi Markatou; Robert Ball
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-06-27       Impact factor: 4.497

10.  Adverse events following vaccination with an inactivated, Vero cell culture-derived Japanese encephalitis vaccine in the United States, 2009-2012.

Authors:  Ingrid B Rabe; Elaine R Miller; Marc Fischer; Susan L Hills
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.641

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.