Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27230999›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Bayesian spatiotemporal modelling for identifying unusual and unstable trends in mammography utilisation.

Earl W Duncan, Nicole M White, Kerrie Mengersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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.

Earl W DuncanARC Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Cooperative Research Centre for Spatial Information, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5146-7810
Nicole M WhiteARC Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Cooperative Research Centre for Spatial Information, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9292-0773
Kerrie MengersenARC Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Cooperative Research Centre for Spatial Information, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare two Bayesian models capable of identifying unusual and unstable temporal patterns in spatiotemporal data.

settingAnnual counts of mammography screening users from each statistical local area (SLA) in Brisbane, Australia, recorded between 1997 and 2008 inclusive. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Mammography screening counts.

resultsThe temporal trends of 91 SLAs (58%) were dissimilar from the overall common temporal trend. SLAs that followed the common temporal trend also tended to have stable temporal trends. SLAs with unstable temporal trends tended to be situated farther from the city and farther from mammography screening facilities.

conclusionsThis paper demonstrates the usefulness of the two models in identifying unusual and unstable temporal trends, and the synergy obtained when both models are applied to the same data set. An analysis of these models has provided interesting insights into the temporal trends of mammography screening counts and has shown several possible avenues for further research, such as extending the models to allow for multiple common temporal trends and accounting for additional spatiotemporal heterogeneity.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalAdultAustraliaBayes TheoremCatchment Area, HealthFemaleHumansMammographySpatio-Temporal AnalysisEPIDEMIOLOGYPUBLIC HEALTHSTATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Identifiers

PMID27230999
PMCPMC4885312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.