This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Drug Therapy  • Adverse Effects  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Regarding the study of vaccinations and subsequent optic neuritis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),¹ the authors made a curious choice of statistical methods. They had access to the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS), an extremely rich database that includes all immunizations, diagnoses for all inpatient and outpatient medical encounters, and additional information for more than 10 million military person-years.

Power

Instead of using this database to perform a highly powered study, a case-control method was chosen, although this method is known to provide relatively weak evidence and is often subject to bias, especially in the selection of controls. The study's power was reduced further by restricting the duration of analysis to 6-, 12-, and 18-week periods following vaccination rather than leaving open-ended the period during which optic neuritis cases were diagnosed after vaccination. In 2003, a congressionally mandated Institute of Medicine report urged the CDC to use . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Controls

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Meryl Nass, MD

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Optic Neuritis and Vaccination Investigation: Failure to Consider Significant Sex Differences and Multiple Vaccine Combinations
Engler et al.
Arch Neurol 2007;64:1673-1674.
FULL TEXT