Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24639031›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2014

Relative risk estimates from spatial and space-time scan statistics: are they biased?

Marcos O Prates, Martin Kulldorff, Renato M Assunção

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Disparities in Temporal and Geographic Patterns of Myocardial Infarction Hospitalization Risks in Florida.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Border analysis for spatial clusters.International journal of health geographics · 2018
    Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Marcos O PratesStatistics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte, MG, CEP 30123-970, Brazil.
Martin Kulldorff
Renato M Assunção

Funding

Modeling Health System Infectious Disease DataU01GM076672 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI HUANG, SUSAN S. · 2006 to 2010
$3.0M
SaTScan: Spatial Scan Statistic Surveillance Software IIR01CA165057 · NCI · HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE, INC. · PI KULLDORFF, MARTIN · 2012 to 2016
$1.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA165057NCI NIH HHS R01CA165057NIGMS NIH HHS U01 GM076672NIGMS NIH HHS U01GM076672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purely spatial and space-time scan statistics have been successfully used by many scientists to detect and evaluate geographical disease clusters. Although the scan statistic has high power in correctly identifying a cluster, no study has considered the estimates of the cluster relative risk in the detected cluster. In this paper, we evaluate whether there is any bias on these estimated relative risks. Intuitively, one may expect that the estimated relative risks has upward bias, because the scan statistic cherry picks high rate areas to include in the cluster. We show that this intuition is correct for clusters with low statistical power, but with medium to high power, the bias becomes negligible. The same behavior is not observed for the prospective space-time scan statistic, where there is an increasing conservative downward bias of the relative risk as the power to detect the cluster increases.

Indexed as

BiasData Interpretation, StatisticalRiskSpace-Time ClusteringComputer SimulationHumansbiasrelative riskscan statisticspace-time statisticsspatial statistics

Identifiers

PMID24639031
PMCPMC4047196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.