Xia Lanfang, Li Keli, Li Yan, An Zhijie, Song Quanwei, Wang Lei, Yin Zundong, Wang Huaqing
National Key Laboratory of Intelligent Tracking and Forecasting for Infectious Diseases (NITFID), Beijing, China.
National Immunization Program, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
China CDC Wkly. 2024 Apr 19;6(16):350-356. doi: 10.46234/ccdcw2024.066.
The current study aims to assess the performance of data mining techniques in detecting safety signals for adverse events following immunization (AEFI) using routinely obtained data in China. Four different methods for detecting vaccine safety signals were evaluated.
The AEFI data from 2011 to 2015 was collected for our study. We analyzed the data using four different methods to detect signals: the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), reporting odds ratio (ROR), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS). Each method was evaluated at 1-3 thresholds for positivity. To assess the performance of these methods, we used the published signal rates as gold standards to determine the sensitivity and specificity.
The number of identified signals varied from 602 for PRR1 (with a threshold of 1) to 127 for MGPS1. When considering the common reactions as the reference standard, the sensitivity ranged from 0.9% for MGPS1/2 to 38.2% for PRR1/2, and the specificity ranged from 85.2% for PRR1 and ROR1 to 96.7% for MGPS1. When considering the rare reactions as the reference standard, PRR1, PRR2, ROR1, ROR2, and BCPNN exhibited the highest sensitivity (73.3%), while MGPS1 exhibited the highest specificity (96.9%).
For common reactions, the sensitivities were modest and the specificities were high. For rare reactions, both the sensitivities and specificities were high. Our study provides valuable insights into the selection of signal detection methods and thresholds for AEFI data in China.
本研究旨在评估数据挖掘技术在中国利用常规获取的数据检测疫苗接种后不良事件(AEFI)安全信号方面的性能。对四种不同的疫苗安全信号检测方法进行了评估。
收集2011年至2015年的AEFI数据用于本研究。我们使用四种不同方法分析数据以检测信号:比例报告率(PRR)、报告比值比(ROR)、贝叶斯置信传播神经网络(BCPNN)和多项目伽马泊松收缩器(MGPS)。每种方法在1至3个阳性阈值下进行评估。为评估这些方法的性能,我们将已公布的信号率作为金标准来确定敏感性和特异性。
识别出的信号数量从PRR1(阈值为1)的602个到MGPS1的127个不等。当将常见反应作为参考标准时,敏感性范围从MGPS1/2的0.9%到PRR1/2的38.2%,特异性范围从PRR1和ROR1的85.2%到MGPS1的96.7%。当将罕见反应作为参考标准时,PRR1、PRR2、ROR1、ROR2和BCPNN表现出最高敏感性(73.3%),而MGPS1表现出最高特异性(96.9%)。
对于常见反应,敏感性适中而特异性较高。对于罕见反应,敏感性和特异性都较高。我们的研究为中国AEFI数据信号检测方法和阈值的选择提供了有价值的见解。