PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Carlos R Oliveira AU - Eugene D Shapiro AU - Daniel M Weinberger TI - Bayesian Model Averaging to Account for Model Uncertainty in Estimates of a Vaccine’s Effectiveness AID - 10.1101/2021.05.12.21257126 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.05.12.21257126 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/15/2021.05.12.21257126.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/15/2021.05.12.21257126.full AB - Vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are often conducted after the introduction of new vaccines to ensure they provide protection in real-world settings. Although susceptible to confounding, the test-negative case-control study design is the most efficient method to assess VE post-licensure. Control of confounding is often needed during the analyses, which is most efficiently done through multivariable modeling. When a large number of potential confounders are being considered, it can be challenging to know which variables need to be included in the final model. This paper highlights the importance of considering model uncertainty by re-analyzing a Lyme VE study using several confounder selection methods. We propose an intuitive Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) framework for this task and compare the performance of BMA to that of traditional single-best-model-selection methods. We demonstrate how BMA can be advantageous in situations when there is uncertainty about model selection by systematically considering alternative models and increasing transparency.Competing Interest StatementDr. Shapiro received an honorarium from Sanofi for a conference call about Lyme vaccine; he also receives royalties from UpToDate and has served as an expert witness in cases related to Lyme disease. Dr. Weinberger has received consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, GSK, and Affinivax for work unrelated to this manuscript. Drs Weinberger and Oliveira have served as Investigators on research grants from Pfizer and Merck to Yale, which are unrelated to this manuscript. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.Funding StatementThese analyses were supported, in part, by the following grants from the National Institutes of Health: UL1TR000142 (E.D.S.), and KL2-TR001862 (E.D.S., C.R.O.), from the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) at the National Institutes of Health and NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. Its contents are solely the authors' responsibility and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIH.Author 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:Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Yale University, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Connecticut Department of Public Health.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.YesOwing to data privacy regulations, the raw Lyme vaccine data for this study cannot be shared.