Sisay Malede Mequanent, Montesinos-Guevara Camila, Osman Alhadi Khogali, Saraswati Putri Widi, Tilahun Binyam, Ayele Tadesse Awoke, Ahmadizar Fariba, Durán Carlos E, Sturkenboom Miriam C J M, van de Ven Peter, Weibel Daniel
Department of Data Science and Biostatistics, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Centro de Investigación en Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública (CISPEC), Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo, Universidad UTE, Quito 341113, Ecuador.
Vaccines (Basel). 2023 May 29;11(6):1035. doi: 10.3390/vaccines11061035.
Post-marketing vaccine safety surveillance aims to monitor and quantify adverse events following immunization in a population, but little is known about their implementation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to synthesize methodological approaches used to assess adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination in LMICs.
For this systematic review, we searched articles published from 1 December 2019 to 18 February 2022 in main databases, including MEDLINE and Embase. We included all peer-reviewed observational COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring studies. We excluded randomized controlled trials and case reports. We extracted data using a standardized extraction form. Two authors assessed study quality using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. All findings were summarized narratively using frequency tables and figures.
Our search found 4254 studies, of which 58 were eligible for analysis. Many of the studies included in this review were conducted in middle-income countries, with 26 studies (45%) in lower-middle-income and 28 (48%) in upper-middle-income countries. More specifically, 14 studies were conducted in the Middle East region, 16 in South Asia, 8 in Latin America, 8 in Europe and Central Asia, and 4 in Africa. Only 3% scored 7-8 points (good quality) on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale methodological quality assessment, while 10% got 5-6 points (medium). About 15 studies (25.9%) used a cohort study design and the rest were cross-sectional. In half of them (50%), vaccination data were gathered from the participants' self-reporting methods. Seventeen studies (29.3%) used multivariable binary logistic regression and three (5.2%) used survival analyses. Only 12 studies (20.7%) performed model diagnostics and validity checks (e.g., the goodness of fit, identification of outliers, and co-linearity).
Published studies on COVID-19 vaccine safety surveillance in LMICs are limited in number and the methods used do not often address potential confounders. Active surveillance of vaccines in LMICs are needed to advocate vaccination programs. Implementing training programs in pharmacoepidemiology in LMICs is essential.
上市后疫苗安全性监测旨在监测和量化人群免疫接种后的不良事件,但对于其在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)的实施情况知之甚少。我们旨在综合用于评估LMICs中COVID-19疫苗接种后不良事件的方法。
对于这项系统评价,我们检索了2019年12月1日至2022年2月18日在主要数据库(包括MEDLINE和Embase)中发表的文章。我们纳入了所有经过同行评审的观察性COVID-19疫苗安全性监测研究。我们排除了随机对照试验和病例报告。我们使用标准化提取表提取数据。两位作者使用改良的纽卡斯尔-渥太华质量评估量表评估研究质量。所有结果均使用频率表和图表进行叙述性总结。
我们的检索发现了4254项研究,其中58项符合分析条件。本评价纳入的许多研究是在中等收入国家进行的,26项研究(45%)在中低收入国家,28项(48%)在上中等收入国家。更具体地说,14项研究在中东地区进行,16项在南亚,8项在拉丁美洲,8项在欧洲和中亚,4项在非洲。在纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表方法学质量评估中,只有3%的研究得分为7-8分(高质量),而10%的研究得分为5-6分(中等质量)。约15项研究(25.9%)采用队列研究设计,其余为横断面研究。其中一半(50%)的疫苗接种数据是通过参与者的自我报告方法收集的。17项研究(29.3%)使用多变量二元逻辑回归,3项(5.2%)使用生存分析。只有12项研究(20.7%)进行了模型诊断和有效性检查(如拟合优度、异常值识别和共线性)。
关于LMICs中COVID-19疫苗安全性监测的已发表研究数量有限,所使用的方法通常未解决潜在的混杂因素。需要在LMICs中对疫苗进行主动监测,以倡导疫苗接种计划。在LMICs中实施药物流行病学培训计划至关重要。