ArticleEmerging themes in epidemiology2015
What's more general than a whole population?
Article in Emerging themes in epidemiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Days at Home After Hip Fracture Among Older Adults With and Without Dementia.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Augmenting the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II for intensive care unit mortality prediction and benchmarking: a French nationwide study.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Loss Limits as a Predictor of Future Gambling Behavior.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Article
- An age-period-cohort-interaction analysis of meth/amphetamine-related deaths in Australia, 2001-2020.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2025Article
- Measuring the patient safety climate in community pharmacies: an updated national survey.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Social Change and Race-Specific Homicide Trajectories: An Age-Period-Cohort Analysis.The Journal of research in crime and delinquency · 2024Article
- A survey of pharmacists' perception of the work environment and patient safety in community pharmacies during the COVID-19 pandemic.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023Article
- Slow data public health.European journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Factors associated with the quality of death certification in Brazilian municipalities: A data-driven non-linear model.PloS one · 2023Article
- Awareness and knowledge of dental erosion and its association with beverage consumption: a multidisciplinary survey.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- A First Look: Disparities in COVID-19 Mortality Among US-Born and Foreign-Born Minnesota Residents.Population research and policy review · 2022Article
- Cohort Variation in U.S. Violent Crime Patterns from 1960 to 2014: An Age-Period-Cohort-Interaction Approach.Journal of quantitative criminology · 2021Article
- A nationwide population-based prospective study of cirrhosis in Iceland.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Statistical inference is commonly said to be inapplicable to complete population studies, such as censuses, due to the absence of sampling variability. Nevertheless, in recent years, studies of whole populations, e.g., all cases of a certain cancer in a given country, have become more common, and often report p values and confidence intervals regardless of such concerns. With reference to the social science literature, the current paper explores the circumstances under which statistical inference can be meaningful for such studies. It concludes that its use implicitly requires a target population which is wider than the whole population studied - for example future cases, or a supranational geographic region - and that the validity of such statistical analysis depends on the generalizability of the whole to the target population.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.