RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Preferential observation of large infectious disease outbreaks leads to consistent overestimation of intervention efficacy
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.11.02.20224832
DO 10.1101/2020.11.02.20224832
A1 Jon Zelner
A1 Nina Masters
A1 Kelly Broen
A1 Eric Lofgren
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/11/04/2020.11.02.20224832.abstract
AB Data from infectious disease outbreaks in congregate settings are often used to elicit clues about which types of interventions may be useful in other facilities. This is commonly done using before-and-after comparisons in which the infectiousness of pre-intervention cases is compared to that of post-intervention cases and the difference is attributed to intervention impact. In this manuscript, we show how a tendency to preferentially observe large outbreaks can lead to consistent overconfidence in how effective these interventions actually are. We show, in particular, that these inferences are highly susceptible to bias when the pathogen under consideration exhibits moderate-to-high amounts of heterogeneity in infectiousness. This includes important pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2, influenza, Noroviruses, HIV, Tuberculosis, and many othersCompeting Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementJZ & NM were funded by an award from the Centers for Disease Control and PreventionAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was conducted using only deidentified secondary data and not subject to IRB approval.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as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).YesI 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.YesCode to re-generate output will be made available upon request.