A Proportional Incidence Rate Model for Aggregated Data to Study the Vaccine Effectiveness Against COVID-19 Hospital and ICU Admissions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We develop a proportional incidence model that estimates vaccine effectiveness (VE) at the population level using conditional likelihood for aggregated data. Our model assumes that the population counts of clinical outcomes for an infectious disease arise from a superposition of Poisson processes with different vaccination statuses. The intensity function in the model is calculated as the product of per capita incidence rate and the at-risk population size, both of which are time-dependent. We formulate a log-linear regression model with respect to the relative risk, defined as the ratio between the per capita incidence rates of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. In the regression analysis, we treat the baseline incidence rate as a nuisance parameter, similar to the Cox proportional hazard model in survival analysis. We then apply the proposed models and methods to age-stratified weekly counts of COVID-19-related hospital and ICU admissions among adults in Ontario, Canada. The data spanned from 2021 to February 2022, encompassing the Omicron era and the rollout of booster vaccine doses. We also discuss the limitations and confounding effects while advocating for the necessity of more comprehensive and up-to-date individual-level data that document the clinical outcomes and measure potential confounders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".