Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Bias-adjusted predictions of county-level vaccination coverage from the COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey

View ORCID ProfileMarissa B. Reitsma, Sherri Rose, View ORCID ProfileAlex Reinhart, View ORCID ProfileJeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert, View ORCID ProfileJoshua A. Salomon
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.18.22275217
Marissa B. Reitsma
1Department of Health Policy, Stanford University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Marissa B. Reitsma
  • For correspondence: mreitsma@stanford.edu
Sherri Rose
1Department of Health Policy, Stanford University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alex Reinhart
3Department of Statistics and Data Science, Carnegie Mellon University
4Delphi Group, Carnegie Mellon University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Alex Reinhart
Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert
1Department of Health Policy, Stanford University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert
Joshua A. Salomon
1Department of Health Policy, Stanford University
2Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Joshua A. Salomon
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

The potential for bias in non-representative, large-scale, low-cost survey data can limit their utility for population health measurement and public health decision-making. We developed a multi-step regression framework to bias-adjust vaccination coverage predictions from the large-scale US COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey that included post-stratification to the American Community Survey and secondary normalization to an unbiased reference indicator. As a case study, we applied this framework to generate county-level predictions of long-run vaccination coverage among children ages 5 to 11 years. Our vaccination coverage predictions suggest a low ceiling on long-term national coverage (46%), detect substantial geographic heterogeneity (ranging from 11% to 91% across counties in the US), and highlight widespread disparities in the pace of scale-up in the three months following Emergency Use Authorization of COVID-19 vaccination for 5 to 11 year-olds. Generally, our analysis demonstrates an approach to leverage differing strengths of multiple sources of information to produce estimates on the time-scale and geographic-scale necessary for proactive decision-making. The utility of large-scale, low-cost survey data for improving population health measurement is amplified when these data are combined with other representative sources of data.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

MBR is supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant No. (DGE-1656518), Stanford's Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program, and the Stanford Data Science Scholars Program. MBR, JDGF, and JAS are supported by the Stanford Clinical and Translational Science Award to Spectrum (UL1TR003142). JDGF, SR, and JAS are supported by funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (NU38OT000297) and by funding from the Health Equity Research Project Fund from Stanford's School of Medicine. JDGF and JAS are supported by funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (3R37DA01561217S1). AR is supported by an unrestricted gift from Facebook. Facebook was involved in the design and conduct of the study. No funders had a role in the analysis and interpretation of the data, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The Institutional Review Board of Stanford University gave ethical approval for this work under protocol number 56018.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

Survey microdata are not publicly available because survey participants only consented to public disclosure of aggregate data, and because the legal agreement with Facebook governing operation of the survey prohibits disclosure of microdata without confidentiality protections for respondents. Deidentified microdata are available to researchers under a Data Use Agreement that protects the confidentiality of respondents. Access can be requested online (https://cmu-delphi.github.io/delphi-epidata/symptom-survey/data-access.html). Requests are reviewed by the Carnegie Mellon University Office of Sponsored Programs and Facebook Data for Good.

https://cmu-delphi.github.io/delphi-epidata/symptom-survey/data-access.html

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted May 21, 2022.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Bias-adjusted predictions of county-level vaccination coverage from the COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Bias-adjusted predictions of county-level vaccination coverage from the COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey
Marissa B. Reitsma, Sherri Rose, Alex Reinhart, Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert, Joshua A. Salomon
medRxiv 2022.05.18.22275217; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.18.22275217
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Bias-adjusted predictions of county-level vaccination coverage from the COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey
Marissa B. Reitsma, Sherri Rose, Alex Reinhart, Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert, Joshua A. Salomon
medRxiv 2022.05.18.22275217; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.18.22275217

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Policy
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (174)
  • Allergy and Immunology (421)
  • Anesthesia (97)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (901)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (170)
  • Dermatology (102)
  • Emergency Medicine (257)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (407)
  • Epidemiology (8789)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (405)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1863)
  • Geriatric Medicine (179)
  • Health Economics (388)
  • Health Informatics (1292)
  • Health Policy (644)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (492)
  • Hematology (207)
  • HIV/AIDS (394)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10565)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (564)
  • Medical Education (193)
  • Medical Ethics (52)
  • Nephrology (218)
  • Neurology (1756)
  • Nursing (103)
  • Nutrition (266)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (343)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (461)
  • Oncology (965)
  • Ophthalmology (283)
  • Orthopedics (107)
  • Otolaryngology (177)
  • Pain Medicine (118)
  • Palliative Medicine (43)
  • Pathology (264)
  • Pediatrics (557)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (265)
  • Primary Care Research (219)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1845)
  • Public and Global Health (3986)
  • Radiology and Imaging (655)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (344)
  • Respiratory Medicine (535)
  • Rheumatology (215)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (178)
  • Sports Medicine (166)
  • Surgery (197)
  • Toxicology (37)
  • Transplantation (106)
  • Urology (80)