IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v43y2020i11d10.1007_s40264-020-00982-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefit-Risk Assessment of Vaccines. Part II: Proposal Towards Consolidated Standards of Reporting Quantitative Benefit-Risk Models Applied to Vaccines (BRIVAC)

Author

Listed:
  • Hugo Arlegui

    (University of Bordeaux, UMR1219
    INSERM, UMR1219, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, Pharmacoepidemiology Team
    GSK)

  • Kaatje Bollaerts

    (P95 Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology Services)

  • Vincent Bauchau

    (GSK)

  • Gaëlle Nachbaur

    (GSK)

  • Bernard Bégaud

    (University of Bordeaux, UMR1219
    INSERM, UMR1219, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, Pharmacoepidemiology Team)

  • Nicolas Praet

    (GSK)

Abstract

Introduction Quantitative benefit-risk models (qBRm) applied to vaccines are increasingly used by public health authorities and pharmaceutical companies as an important tool to help decision makers with supporting benefit-risk assessment (BRA). However, many publications on vaccine qBRm provide insufficient details on the methodological approaches used. Incomplete and/or inadequate qBRm reporting may affect result interpretation and confidence in BRA, highlighting a need for the development of standard reporting guidance. Objectives Our objective was to provide an operational checklist for improved reporting of vaccine qBRm. Methods The consolidated standards of reporting quantitative Benefit-RIsk models applied to VACcines (BRIVAC) were designed as a checklist of key information to report in qBRm scientific publications regarding the assessed vaccines, the methodological considerations and the results and their interpretation. Results In total, 22 items and accompanying definitions, recommendations, explanations and examples were provided and divided into six main sections corresponding to the classic subdivisions of a scientific publication: title and abstract (items 1–2), introduction (items 3–4), methods (items 5–15), results (items 16–17), discussion (items 18–20) and other (items 21–22). Conclusions The BRIVAC checklist is the first initiative providing an operational checklist for improved reporting of qBRm applied to vaccines in scientific articles. It is intended to assist authors, peer-reviewers, editors and readers in their critical appraisal. Future initiatives are needed to provide methodological guidance to perform qBRm while taking into account the vaccine specificities.

Suggested Citation

  • Hugo Arlegui & Kaatje Bollaerts & Vincent Bauchau & Gaëlle Nachbaur & Bernard Bégaud & Nicolas Praet, 2020. "Benefit-Risk Assessment of Vaccines. Part II: Proposal Towards Consolidated Standards of Reporting Quantitative Benefit-Risk Models Applied to Vaccines (BRIVAC)," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(11), pages 1105-1120, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:11:d:10.1007_s40264-020-00982-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-020-00982-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-020-00982-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-020-00982-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hugo Arlegui & Kaatje Bollaerts & Francesco Salvo & Vincent Bauchau & Gaëlle Nachbaur & Bernard Bégaud & Nicolas Praet, 2020. "Benefit–Risk Assessment of Vaccines. Part I: A Systematic Review to Identify and Describe Studies About Quantitative Benefit–Risk Models Applied to Vaccines," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(11), pages 1089-1104, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:11:d:10.1007_s40264-020-00982-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.