The extent and impact of vaccine status miscategorisation on covid-19 vaccine efficacy studies
Neil, M.; McLachlan, S.; Fenton, N.
Show abstract
It is recognised that many observational studies and randomised control trials reporting high efficacy for Covid-19 vaccines suffer from various biases. Systematic review identified thirty-seven studies that suffered from one particular and serious form of bias called miscategorisation bias, whereby study participants who have been vaccinated are categorised as unvaccinated up to and until some arbitrarily defined time after vaccination occurred. Simulation demonstrates that this miscategorisation bias artificially boosts vaccine efficacy and infection rates even when a vaccine has zero or negative efficacy. Furthermore, simulation demonstrates that repeated boosters, given every few months, are needed to maintain this misleading impression of efficacy. Given this, any claims of Covid-19 vaccine efficacy based on these studies are likely to be a statistical illusion or are exaggerated.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- What is the quality of evidence informing vaccine clinical practice recommendations in Australia? 95%
- A comparison of four self-controlled study designs in an analysis of COVID-19 vaccines and Myocarditis using Five European Databases 94%
- A Meta-Analysis of Influenza Vaccination Following Correspondence: Considerations for COVID-19 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Effect of information about COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and side effects on behavioural intentions: two online experiments 95%
- Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis 94%
- The Societal Value of Vaccines: Expert-Based Conceptual Framework and Methods Using COVID-19 Vaccines as A Case Study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Effects of Side-Effect Risk Framing Strategies on COVID-19 Vaccine Intentions: A Randomized Controlled Trial 95%
- HPV and HBV vaccine hesitancy, intention, and uptake in the era of social media and COVID-19: A review 94%
- Building resilient cervical cancer prevention through gender-neutral HPV vaccination 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.