4.6 Article

Near Real-Time Surveillance for Influenza Vaccine Safety: Proof-of-Concept in the Vaccine Safety Datalink Project

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 171, 期 2, 页码 177-188

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwp345

关键词

cohort studies; influenza; human; influenza vaccines; managed care programs; population surveillance; safety; vaccines

资金

  1. Sanofi Pasteur
  2. Chiron
  3. MedImmune
  4. Merck
  5. Wyeth
  6. Novartis
  7. GSK

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The emergence of pandemic H1N1 influenza in 2009 has prompted public health responses, including production and licensure of new influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Safety monitoring is a critical component of vaccination programs. As proof-of-concept, the authors mimicked near real-time prospective surveillance for prespecified neurologic and allergic adverse events among enrollees in 8 medical care organizations (the Vaccine Safety Datalink Project) who received seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine during the 2005/06-2007/08 influenza seasons. In self-controlled case series analysis, the risk of adverse events in a prespecified exposure period following vaccination was compared with the risk in 1 control period for the same individual either before or after vaccination. In difference-in-difference analysis, the relative risk in exposed versus control periods each season was compared with the relative risk in previous seasons since 2000/01. The authors used Poisson-based analysis to compare the risk of Guillian-Barre syndrome following vaccination in each season with that in previous seasons. Maximized sequential probability ratio tests were used to adjust for repeated analyses on weekly data. With administration of 1,195,552 doses to children under age 18 years and 4,773,956 doses to adults, no elevated risk of adverse events was identified. Near real-time surveillance for selected adverse events can be implemented prospectively to rapidly assess seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccine safety.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据