Unmeasured confounding and misclassification in vaccine effectiveness studies using electronic health records (EHRs): an evaluation of a multi country European study (VEBIS-EHR)
Humphreys, J.; Nicolay, N.; Braeye, T.; Van Evercooren, I.; Holm Hansen, C.; Rask Moustsen-Helms, I.; Sacco, C.; Fabiani, M.; Castilla, J.; Martinez-Baz, I.; Machado, A.; Soares, P.; de Gier, B.; Meijerink, H.; Monge, S.; Bacci, S.; Nunes, B.; VEBIS-EHR working group,
Show abstract
BackgroundElectronic health record (EHR)-based observational studies can rapidly provide real-world data on vaccine effectiveness (VE), particularly key during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, EHR data may be prone to misclassification and unmeasured confounding, requiring systematic mitigation to ensure robust findings. MethodsIn VEBIS-EHR, a retrospective multi-country COVID-19 VE cohort study, we examined unmeasured confounding using a negative control outcome (death not related to COVID-19) and misclassification from varying data extraction intervals. The evaluation spanned two periods (November-December 2023, January-February 2024), encompassing up to 18.7 million individuals across six EU/EEA countries. Vaccine confounding-adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. ResultsaHRs against non-COVID-19 mortality ranged from 0.35 (95% CI: 0.28-0.44) to 0.70 (0.66-0.73) when comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated. Delaying EHR data extraction modestly increased the capture of outcome and exposure events, with some variation by vaccination status. Site-level fluctuations in aHRs did not meaningfully alter the overall pooled VE, suggesting stable estimates despite misclassification related to extraction timing. ConclusionsWe observed some evidence of unmeasured confounding when using non-COVID-19 deaths as a negative outcome, though the specificity of our negative control must be considered. This result may suggest overestimation of VE, but also the need for further analysis with more specific negative control outcomes and confounding-adjustment techniques. Addressing such confounding using richer data sources and more refined approaches remains critical to ensure accurate, timely VE estimates when using real-world EHR-based data. Extending the delay between the end of observation and data extraction modestly improves the completeness of exposure and outcome data, with limited effect on pooled VE estimates. Key MessagesA Key Messages section should be added after the keywords and before the articles introduction, with the key messages of the paper made in 3 bullet points that succinctly describe: O_LIWhat your research question was: Whether vaccine effectiveness estimates based on EHR data are internally valid according to analyses focused on two topics of concern related to EHR-based observational research - unmeasured confounding and misclassification. C_LIO_LIWhat you found: We observed unmeasured confounding in our estimates when using non-COVID19 deaths as negative outcome, and timing of data abstraction from source EHRs was found to have a small influence on the capture and classification of exposure and outcome. C_LIO_LIWhy it is important: Our results reinforce earlier evidence of the healthy vaccinee phenomenon indicating possible biases in the estimates of vaccine effectiveness estimates obtained from EHR data and that there appears to be little influence of EHR extraction timing on data completeness. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Estimating the effectiveness of first dose of COVID-19 vaccine against mortality in England: a quasi-experimental study 95%
- Protection of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is similar to that of BNT162b2 vaccine protection: A three-month nationwide experience from Israel 93%
- Exploring the Application of Target Trial Emulation in Vaccine Evaluation: Scoping Review 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Change in COVID-19 risk over time following vaccination with CoronaVac: A test-negative case-control study 95%
- Comparative effectiveness of ChAdOx1 versus BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines in Health and Social Care workers in England: a cohort study using OpenSAFELY 95%
- Early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination with BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector vaccine on symptomatic disease, hospitalisations and mortality in older adults in England 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparative effectiveness of different primary vaccination courses on mRNA based booster vaccines against SARs-COV-2 infections: A time-varying cohort analysis using trial emulation in the Virus Watch community cohort 94%
- The effect of SARS-CoV-2 testing on healthcare seeking behaviour at primary care level: implications for COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness estimates in test-negative design studies. 93%
- Cohort profile: Virus Watch: Understanding community incidence, symptom profiles, and transmission of COVID-19 in relation to population movement and behaviour 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19 vaccination and short-term mortality risk: a nationwide self-controlled case series study in The Netherlands 93%
- Infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in community-dwelling populations with emphasis on the elderly: An overview 92%
- Ethnic differences in COVID-19 mortality during the first two waves of the Coronavirus Pandemic: a nationwide cohort study of 29 million adults in England 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Averted mortality by COVID-19 vaccination in Belgium between 2021 and 2023 96%
- Number of COVID-19 hospitalisations averted by vaccination: Estimates for the Netherlands, January 6, 2021 through August 30, 2022 95%
- Impact of CoronaVac on Covid-19 outcomes of elderly adults in a large and socially unequal Brazilian city: A target trial emulation study 95%
"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.