Glasziou Paul, McCaffery Kirsten, Cvejic Erin, Batcup Carys, Ayre Julie, Pickles Kristen, Bonner Carissa
Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty HS&M, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
J Assoc Med Microbiol Infect Dis Can. 2022 Sep 27;7(3):242-246. doi: 10.3138/jammi-2022-0002. eCollection 2022 Sep.
Recent observational studies suggest that vaccines may have little effect in preventing infection with the Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. However, the observed effects may be confounded by patient factors, preventive behaviours, or differences in testing behaviour. To assess potential confounding, we examined differences in testing behaviour between unvaccinated and vaccinated populations.
We recruited 1,526 Australian adults for an online randomized study about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing in late 2021, collecting self-reported vaccination status and three measures of COVID-19 testing behaviour: testing in past month or ever and test intention if they woke with a sore throat. We examined the association between testing intentions and vaccination status in the trial's baseline data.
Of the 1,526 participants (mean age 31 y), 22% had a COVID-19 test in the past month and 61% ever; 17% were unvaccinated, 11% were partially vaccinated (one dose), and 71% were fully vaccinated (two or more doses). Fully vaccinated participants were twice as likely as those who were unvaccinated (relative risk [RR] 2.2, 95% CI 1.8 to 2.8, < 0.001) to report positive COVID testing intentions. Partially vaccinated participants had less positive intentions than fully vaccinated participants (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89, < 0.001) but higher intentions than unvaccinated participants (RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 1.6, = 0.002).
Vaccination predicted greater COVID-19 testing intentions and would substantially bias observed vaccine effectiveness. To account for differential testing behaviours, test-negative designs are currently the preferred option, but their assumptions need more thorough examination.
近期的观察性研究表明,疫苗在预防严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2的奥密克戎变种感染方面可能效果甚微。然而,观察到的效果可能受到患者因素、预防行为或检测行为差异的混淆。为评估潜在的混杂因素,我们研究了未接种疫苗人群和接种疫苗人群在检测行为上的差异。
2021年末,我们招募了1526名澳大利亚成年人参与一项关于2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)检测的在线随机研究,收集自我报告的疫苗接种状况以及三项COVID-19检测行为指标:过去一个月内或曾经进行过检测,以及如果醒来时喉咙痛的检测意愿。我们在试验的基线数据中研究了检测意愿与疫苗接种状况之间的关联。
在1526名参与者(平均年龄31岁)中,22%在过去一个月内进行过COVID-19检测,61%曾经检测过;17%未接种疫苗,11%部分接种(一剂),71%完全接种(两剂或更多剂)。完全接种疫苗的参与者报告有阳性COVID检测意愿的可能性是未接种疫苗者的两倍(相对风险[RR]2.2,95%置信区间1.8至2.8,<0.001)。部分接种疫苗的参与者的意愿不如完全接种疫苗的参与者积极(RR 0.68,95%置信区间0.52至0.89,<0.001),但比未接种疫苗的参与者意愿更高(RR 1.5,95%置信区间1.4至1.6,=0.002)。
接种疫苗预示着更高的COVID-19检测意愿,这将极大地影响观察到的疫苗效力。为考虑不同的检测行为,目前检测阴性设计是首选方案,但其假设需要更全面的检验。