Wpis z mikrobloga

Warto przypomnieć dlaczego podawanie skuteczności szczepionki było manipulacją:

Reporting relative risk reduction (RRR), as usually done in phase 3 studies, does not consider the background risk of being infected and becoming ill with COVID-19, which varies between population and over time. For this reason, several researchers argued that the absolute risk reduction (ARR), namely the difference between attack rates with and without the vaccine, should also be reported [1,2]. The two indices, being conceptually different, are of different order of magnitude (Table 1) [3–10]; for example, the 95% RRR for BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine [3] corresponds to 0.85% ARR [1]. Using one of the two measures to estimate the risk/benefit ratio would lead to different conclusions. We need to examine some points to use these indicators in an optimal way.

Comparison with vaccines against other respiratory-borne viruses is likely to be of little use in interpreting these data. As an example, efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines are estimated on studies lasting the whole influenza season (5–6 months), considerably longer than COVID-19 vaccine studies [11], and are tested in a completely different background situation, with no or limited use of mitigation procedures at population level (social distancing, use of face-masks). Both these elements, as we will see shortly, can substantially influence the effectiveness of vaccines as estimated by phase 3 trials.

In conclusion, reporting results both in terms of ARR and RRR would be undoubtedly more complete, allowing both an estimate of the intrinsic preventive efficacy of vaccines and (with some caution) of their effectiveness during translation in the real world through vaccination campaigns.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9115787/

#koronawirus #szczepienia #covid19 #oszukujo
  • 4