Bayesian Model Averaging to Account for Model Uncertainty in Estimates of a Vaccine's Effectiveness

被引:2
|
作者
Oliveira, Carlos R. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Shapiro, Eugene D. [1 ,3 ]
Weinberger, Daniel M. [3 ]
机构
[1] Yale Univ, Dept Pediat, Sch Med, New Haven, CT USA
[2] Yale Univ, Dept Biostat, Sch Publ Hlth, New Haven, CT USA
[3] Yale Univ, Dept Epidemiol Microbial Dis, Sch Publ Hlth, New Haven, CT USA
[4] Yale Univ, Sch Med, 464 Congress Ave,Suite 204, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
来源
CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY | 2022年 / 14卷
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Bayesian model averaging; model uncertainty; vaccine effectiveness; Lyme vaccine; VARIABLE SELECTION; ADJUSTMENT; INFERENCE;
D O I
10.2147/CLEP.S378039
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Purpose: Vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are often conducted after the introduction of new vaccines to ensure they provide protection in real-world settings. Control of confounding is often needed during the analyses, which is most efficiently done through multivariable modeling. When many confounders are being considered, it can be challenging to know which variables need to be included in the final model. We propose an intuitive Bayesian model averaging (BMA) framework for this task. Patients and Methods: Data were used from a matched case-control study that aimed to assess the effectiveness of the Lyme vaccine post-licensure. Cases were residents of Connecticut, 15-70 years of age with confirmed Lyme disease. Up to 2 healthy controls were matched to each case subject by age. All participants were interviewed, and medical records were reviewed to ascertain immunization history and evaluate potential confounders. BMA was used to systematically search for potential models and calculate the weighted average VE estimate from the top subset of models. The performance of BMA was compared to three traditional single-best-model-selection methods: two-stage selection, stepwise elimination, and the leaps and bounds algorithm. Results: The analysis included 358 cases and 554 matched controls. VE ranged between 56% and 73% and 95% confidence intervals crossed zero in <5% of all candidate models. Averaging across the top 15 models, the BMA VE was 69% (95% CI: 18-88%). The two-stage, stepwise, and leaps and bounds algorithm yielded VE of 71% (95% CI: 21-90%), 73% (95% CI: 26-90%), and 74% (95% CI: 27-91%), respectively. Conclusion: This paper highlights how the BMA framework can be used to generate transparent and robust estimates of VE. The BMA-derived VE and confidence intervals were similar to those estimated using traditional methods. However, by incorporating model uncertainty into the parameter estimation, BMA can lend additional rigor and credibility to a well-designed study.
引用
收藏
页码:1167 / 1175
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Incorporating model uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis:: A Bayesian model averaging approach
    Negrin, Miguel A.
    Vazquez-Polo, Francisco-Jose
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2008, 27 (05) : 1250 - 1259
  • [2] Modelling survival data to account for model uncertainty: a single model or model averaging?
    Thamrin, Astuti
    McGree, James M.
    Mengersen, Kerrie L.
    [J]. SPRINGERPLUS, 2013, 2 : 1 - 13
  • [3] Model uncertainty and asset return predictability: an application of Bayesian model averaging
    Masih, Rumi
    Masih, A. Mansur M.
    Mie, Kilian
    [J]. APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2010, 42 (15) : 1963 - 1972
  • [4] Model Selection Uncertainty and Bayesian Model Averaging in Fisheries Recruitment Modeling
    Jiao, Yan
    Reid, Kevin
    Smith, Eric
    [J]. FUTURE OF FISHERIES SCIENCE IN NORTH AMERICA, 2009, 31 : 505 - +
  • [5] Evaluation of crop model prediction and uncertainty using Bayesian parameter estimation and Bayesian model averaging
    Gao, Yujing
    Wallach, Daniel
    Hasegawa, Toshihiro
    Tang, Liang
    Zhang, Ruoyang
    Asseng, Senthold
    Kahveci, Tamer
    Liu, Leilei
    He, Jianqiang
    Hoogenboom, Gerrit
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY, 2021, 311
  • [6] Bayesian model averaging for probabilistic S-N curves with probability distribution model form uncertainty
    Zou, Qingrong
    Wen, Jici
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FATIGUE, 2023, 177
  • [7] Bayesian model averaging assessment on groundwater management under model structure uncertainty
    Tsai, Frank T. -C.
    [J]. STOCHASTIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND RISK ASSESSMENT, 2010, 24 (06) : 845 - 861
  • [8] An Approach to Addressing Multiple Imputation Model Uncertainty Using Bayesian Model Averaging
    Kaplan, David
    Yavuz, Sinan
    [J]. MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2020, 55 (04) : 553 - 567
  • [9] Accounting for conceptual model uncertainty via maximum likelihood Bayesian model averaging
    Neuman, S.P.
    [J]. IAHS-AISH Publication, 2002, (277): : 303 - 313
  • [10] Bayesian model averaging assessment on groundwater management under model structure uncertainty
    Frank T.-C. Tsai
    [J]. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 2010, 24 : 845 - 861