A case-crossover study of the effect of vaccination on SARS-CoV-2 transmission relevant behaviours during a period of national lockdown in England and Wales

Serisier, Aimee; Beale, Sarah; Boukari, Yamina; Hoskins, Susan; Nguyen, Vincent; Byrne, Thomas; Fong, Wing Lam Erica; Fragaszy, Ellen; Geismar, Cyril; Kovar, Jana; Yavlinsky, Alexei; Hayward, Andrew; Aldridge, Robert W

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.11.073

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because people might change their behavior after vaccination, the total effect, which quantifies the joint effect of receiving both the vaccine ingredient and the message, is a relevant parameter for policy makers when deciding vaccine policies. This effect is different from the effect given in (1). That is, the effect in ( 1) is analogous to the effect targeted in a successfully blinded experiment, where the intention might be to eliminate placebo effects by fixing m = −1; the effect in (2) is the effect in an unblinded trial and captures different pathways by which vaccination can affect the outcome of interest.…”

Section: Causal Effects and Target Trials Conventional Two-arm Trialmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…which is a special case of the generic causal contrasts (1) and (3). We can plausibly interpret VE(0) and VE (1) as immunologic VEs, but the interpretation of VE(−1) as an immunologic VE is more subtle, and depends on whether blinding is broken. Nevertheless, VE(−1) is usually the implicit target parameter in a blinded RCT.…”

Section: Define Vaccine Efficacy (Ve) Under Interventions On a And M Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, the potential infection rate of unvaccinated people, had they been told they received the vaccine is E(Y a=0,m=1 ) = 0.01. Using these specifications, we can write VE(0) and VE (1) as functions of VE t , and VE(−1) as a function of VE t and RR B, see eAppendix F.1; http://links.lww.com/EDE/C95.…”

Section: Illustration Of Numerical Differences In Vaccine Efficacy Es...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even when blinding is successful, such that RR B = 1, VE(−1) might differ from VE t (Figure 4). When RR B = 1, then VE(−1) = VE(0) = VE (1).…”

Section: Illustration Of Numerical Differences In Vaccine Efficacy Es...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Epidemiology 2024;35: 154-163) P harmaceutical interventions are commonly justified by their immunologic mechanisms of action, but they might also affect outcomes through other pathways. For example, recipients of vaccines have been reported to increase their number of social contacts due to perceived protective effects, [1][2][3] although the extent of such behavioral changes varies across populations and time. [4][5][6][7] Conventional vaccine trials are designed to identify the immunologic effects of vaccines.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Distinguishing Immunologic and Behavioral Effects of Vaccination

Stensrud,

Nevo,

Obolski

2024

Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interpretation of vaccine efficacy estimands is subtle, even in randomized trials designed to quantify the immunologic effects of vaccination. In this article, we introduce terminology to distinguish between different vaccine efficacy estimands and clarify their interpretations. This allows us to explicitly consider the immunologic and behavioral effects of vaccination, and establish that policy-relevant estimands can differ substantially from those commonly reported in vaccine trials. We further show that a conventional vaccine trial allows the identification and estimation of different vaccine estimands under plausible conditions if one additional post-treatment variable is measured. Specifically, we utilize a “belief variable” that indicates the treatment an individual believed they had received. The belief variable is similar to “blinding assessment” variables that are occasionally collected in placebo-controlled trials in other fields. We illustrate the relations between the different estimands, and their practical relevance, in numerical examples based on an influenza vaccine trial.

show abstract

Section: Causal Effects and Target Trials Conventional Two-arm Trialmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Define Vaccine Efficacy (Ve) Under Interventions On a And M Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Illustration Of Numerical Differences In Vaccine Efficacy Es...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even when blinding is successful, such that RR B = 1, VE(−1) might differ from VE t (Figure 4). When RR B = 1, then VE(−1) = VE(0) = VE (1).…”

Section: Illustration Of Numerical Differences In Vaccine Efficacy Es...mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Distinguishing Immunologic and Behavioral Effects of Vaccination

Stensrud,

Nevo,

Obolski

2024

Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The impact of COVID-19 vaccination on human mobility: The London case

Bei

Zhi

et al. 2023

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigating the causal effects of COVID-19 vaccination on the adoption of protective behaviors in Japan: Insights from a fuzzy regression discontinuity design

Chen,

Nakanishi,

Sekizawa

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns emerged that vaccinated individuals might engage less in infection-preventive behaviors, potentially contributing to virus transmission. This study evaluates the causal effects of COVID-19 vaccination on such behaviors within Japan, highlighting the significance of understanding behavioral dynamics in public health strategies. Methods Utilizing Japan’s age-based vaccination priority for those born before April 1, 1957, this research employs a regression discontinuity design (RDD) to assess the vaccination’s impact. Data from the fourth round of a longitudinal online survey, conducted from July 20 to 27, 2021, served as the basis for analyzing 14 infection-protective behaviors, including mask usage, handwashing, and avoiding crowds. Results A total of 12067 participants completed the survey. The analyzed sample size varied by outcome variable, ranging from 1499 to 5233. The analysis revealed no significant differences in the 14 behaviors examined among fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, and unvaccinated individuals. This consistency across groups suggests that vaccination status did not significantly alter engagement in protective behaviors during the observation period. Conclusions Empirical findings highlight the complexity of behavioral responses following vaccination, indicating that such responses may be influenced by various factors, rather than by vaccination status alone. Additionally, this result underscores the importance of crafting public health policies that account for the intricate interplay between vaccination and behavior. This study contributes to the broader discourse on managing responses to the pandemic and tailoring interventions to sustain or enhance protective health behaviors amid vaccination rollouts.

show abstract

A case-crossover study of the effect of vaccination on SARS-CoV-2 transmission relevant behaviours during a period of national lockdown in England and Wales

Cited by 5 publications

References 36 publications

Distinguishing Immunologic and Behavioral Effects of Vaccination

Distinguishing Immunologic and Behavioral Effects of Vaccination

The impact of COVID-19 vaccination on human mobility: The London case

Investigating the causal effects of COVID-19 vaccination on the adoption of protective behaviors in Japan: Insights from a fuzzy regression discontinuity design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About