Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 9, 2025
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Quantifying and Adjusting for Confounding From Health-Seeking Behavior and Health Care Access in Observational
Sophie Graham1,2, Jemma L Walker1,2,3, Nick Andrews2,3
1Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Background:
Health-seeking behavior and health care access (HSB/HCA) are recognized confounders in many observational studies but are not directly measurable in electronic health records. We used proxy markers of HSB/HCA to quantify and adjust for confounding in observational studies of influenza and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE).
Methods:
This cohort study used primary care data prelinked to secondary care and death data in England. We included individuals aged ≥66 years on 1 September 2019 and assessed influenza VE in the 2019-2020 season and early COVID-19 VE (December 2020-March 2021). VE was estimated with sequential adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and 14 markers of HSB/HCA. Influenza vaccination in the 2019-2020 season was also considered a negative control exposure against COVID-19 before COVID-19 vaccine rollout.
Results:
We included 1 991 284, 1 796 667, and 1 946 943 individuals in the influenza, COVID-19, and negative control exposure populations, respectively. Markers of HSB/HCA were positively correlated with influenza and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. For influenza, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers in addition to demographics and comorbidities increased VE against influenza-like illness from -1.5% (95% CI, -3.2% to .1%) to 7.1% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.7%) with a less apparent trend for more severe outcomes. For COVID-19, adjusting for HSB/HCA markers did not change VE estimates against infection or severe disease (eg, 2 doses of BNT162b2 against infection: 82.8% [95% CI, 78.4%-86.3%] to 83.1% [95% CI, 78.7%-86.5%]). Adjusting for HSB/HCA markers removed bias in the negative control exposure analysis (-7.5% [95% CI, -10.6% to -4.5%] vs -2.1% [95% CI, -6.0% to 1.7%] before vs after adjusting for HSB/HCA markers).
Conclusions:
Markers of HSB/HCA can be used to quantify and account for confounding in observational vaccine studies.
More Related Videos
05:59Visualization of Intensity Levels to Reduce the Gap Between Self-Reported and Directly Measured Physical Activity
Published on: March 7, 2019
08:01A Method for Manipulating Blood Glucose and Measuring Resulting Changes in Cognitive Accessibility of Target Stimuli
Published on: August 12, 2016
Related Concept Videos
01:25Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
01:27Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:29Bias in Epidemiological Studies
01:11Observational Studies
There are three types of observational studies – Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional.
Prospective Study
Prospective studies, also known as longitudinal or cohort studies, are carried out by collecting future data from groups sharing similar characteristics. One...
01:08Data Collection by Observations
An astronomer viewing the motion and brightness of stars in the sky and recording the data is an example of observational data collection. A botanist recording...