Huiying Chua1, Shuo Feng1, Joseph A Lewnard2, Sheena G Sullivan3,4,5, Christopher C Blyth6,7,8, Marc Lipsitch9,10, Benjamin J Cowling1. 1. From the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China. 2. Division of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA. 3. WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza, Royal Melbourne Hospital, and Doherty Department, University of Melbourne, at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 5. Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 6. Division of Paediatrics, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 7. Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 8. Department of Infectious Diseases, Perth Children's Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 9. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA. 10. Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The test-negative design is an increasingly popular approach for estimating vaccine effectiveness (VE) due to its efficiency. This review aims to examine published test-negative design studies of VE and to explore similarities and differences in methodological choices for different diseases and vaccines. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, and Medline, for studies reporting the effectiveness of any vaccines using a test-negative design. We screened titles and abstracts and reviewed full texts to identify relevant articles. We created a standardized form for each included article to extract information on the pathogen of interest, vaccine(s) being evaluated, study setting, clinical case definition, choices of cases and controls, and statistical approaches used to estimate VE. RESULTS: We identified a total of 348 articles, including studies on VE against influenza virus (n = 253), rotavirus (n = 48), pneumococcus (n = 24), and nine other pathogens. Clinical case definitions used to enroll patients were similar by pathogens of interest but the sets of symptoms that defined them varied substantially. Controls could be those testing negative for the pathogen of interest, those testing positive for nonvaccine type of the pathogen of interest, or a subset of those testing positive for alternative pathogens. Most studies controlled for age, calendar time, and comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Our review highlights similarities and differences in the application of the test-negative design that deserve further examination. If vaccination reduces disease severity in breakthrough infections, particular care must be taken in interpreting vaccine effectiveness estimates from test-negative design studies.
BACKGROUND: The test-negative design is an increasingly popular approach for estimating vaccine effectiveness (VE) due to its efficiency. This review aims to examine published test-negative design studies of VE and to explore similarities and differences in methodological choices for different diseases and vaccines. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, and Medline, for studies reporting the effectiveness of any vaccines using a test-negative design. We screened titles and abstracts and reviewed full texts to identify relevant articles. We created a standardized form for each included article to extract information on the pathogen of interest, vaccine(s) being evaluated, study setting, clinical case definition, choices of cases and controls, and statistical approaches used to estimate VE. RESULTS: We identified a total of 348 articles, including studies on VE against influenza virus (n = 253), rotavirus (n = 48), pneumococcus (n = 24), and nine other pathogens. Clinical case definitions used to enroll patients were similar by pathogens of interest but the sets of symptoms that defined them varied substantially. Controls could be those testing negative for the pathogen of interest, those testing positive for nonvaccine type of the pathogen of interest, or a subset of those testing positive for alternative pathogens. Most studies controlled for age, calendar time, and comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Our review highlights similarities and differences in the application of the test-negative design that deserve further examination. If vaccination reduces disease severity in breakthrough infections, particular care must be taken in interpreting vaccine effectiveness estimates from test-negative design studies.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Qingxia Chen; Marie R Griffin; Hui Nian; Yuwei Zhu; John V Williams; Kathryn M Edwards; H Keipp Talbot Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Danuta M Skowronski; Gaston De Serres; Jim Dickinson; Martin Petric; Annie Mak; Kevin Fonseca; Trijntje L Kwindt; Tracy Chan; Nathalie Bastien; Hugues Charest; Yan Li Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2009-01-15 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Katherine E Fleming-Dutra; Amadea Britton; Nong Shang; Gordana Derado; Ruth Link-Gelles; Emma K Accorsi; Zachary R Smith; Joseph Miller; Jennifer R Verani; Stephanie J Schrag Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Leora R Feldstein; Wesley H Self; Jill M Ferdinands; Adrienne G Randolph; Michael Aboodi; Adrienne H Baughman; Samuel M Brown; Matthew C Exline; D Clark Files; Kevin Gibbs; Adit A Ginde; Michelle N Gong; Carlos G Grijalva; Natasha Halasa; Akram Khan; Christopher J Lindsell; Margaret Newhams; Ithan D Peltan; Matthew E Prekker; Todd W Rice; Nathan I Shapiro; Jay Steingrub; H Keipp Talbot; M Elizabeth Halloran; Manish Patel Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Jordan E Cates; Avnika B Amin; Jacqueline E Tate; Ben Lopman; Umesh Parashar Journal: Pediatr Infect Dis J Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Emma K Accorsi; Amadea Britton; Katherine E Fleming-Dutra; Zachary R Smith; Nong Shang; Gordana Derado; Joseph Miller; Stephanie J Schrag; Jennifer R Verani Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-02-15 Impact factor: 157.335