Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20492737›Full record

ArticlePopulation health metrics2010

Early mortality experience in a large military cohort and a comparison of mortality data sources.

Tomoko I Hooper, Gary D Gackstetter, Cynthia A Leardmann, Edward J Boyko, Lisa A Pearse, Besa Smith, Paul J Amoroso, Tyler C Smith, Millennium Cohort Study Team

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Population health metrics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Tomoko I HooperDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Biometrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. thooper@usuhs.mil.
Gary D Gackstetter
Cynthia A Leardmann
Edward J Boyko
Lisa A Pearse
Besa Smith
Paul J Amoroso
Tyler C Smith
Millennium Cohort Study Team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComplete and accurate ascertainment of mortality is critically important in any longitudinal study. Tracking of mortality is particularly essential among US military members because of unique occupational exposures (e.g., worldwide deployments as well as combat experiences). Our study objectives were to describe the early mortality experience of Panel 1 of the Millennium Cohort, consisting of participants in a 21-year prospective study of US military service members, and to assess data sources used to ascertain mortality.

methodsA population-based random sample (n = 256,400) of all US military service members on service rosters as of October 1, 2000, was selected for study recruitment. Among this original sample, 214,388 had valid mailing addresses, were not in the pilot study, and comprised the group referred to in this study as the invited sample. Panel 1 participants were enrolled from 2001 to 2003, represented all armed service branches, and included active-duty, Reserve, and National Guard members. Crude death rates, as well as age- and sex-adjusted overall and age-adjusted, category-specific death rates were calculated and compared for participants (n = 77,047) and non-participants (n = 137,341) based on data from the Social Security Administration Death Master File, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) files, and the Department of Defense Medical Mortality Registry, 2001-2006. Numbers of deaths identified by these three data sources, as well as the National Death Index, were compared for 2001-2004.

resultsThere were 341 deaths among the participants for a crude death rate of 80.7 per 100,000 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 72.2,89.3) compared to 820 deaths and a crude death rate of 113.2 per 100,000 person-years (95% CI: 105.4, 120.9) for non-participants. Age-adjusted, category-specific death rates highlighted consistently higher rates among study non-participants. Although there were advantages and disadvantages for each data source, the VA mortality files identified the largest number of deaths (97%).

conclusionsThe difference in crude and adjusted death rates between Panel 1 participants and non-participants may reflect healthier segments of the military having the opportunity and choosing to participate. In our study population, mortality information was best captured using multiple data sources.

Identifiers

PMID20492737
PMCPMC2887816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.