Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30046636›Full record

ArticleAnnual review of statistics and its application2018

Multiple Systems Estimation (or Capture-Recapture Estimation) to Inform Public Policy.

Sheila M Bird, Ruth King

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annual review of statistics and its application, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Excess Mortality Estimation.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Multifile Partitioning for Record Linkage and Duplicate Detection.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The definition and measurement of heterogeneity.Translational psychiatry · 2020
    Review
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

2 authors.

Sheila M BirdMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Institute for Public Health Cambridge CB2 0SR.
Ruth KingUniversity of Edinburgh, School of Mathematics, Edinburgh EH9 3FD.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U105260794
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Estimating population sizes has long been of interest, from the estimation of the human or ecological population size within regions or countries to the hidden number of civilian casualties in a war. Total enumeration of the population, for example, via a census, is often infeasible or simply impractical. However, a series of partial enumerations or observations of the population is often possible. This has led to the ideas of capture-recapture methods, which have been extensively used within ecology to estimate the size of wildlife populations, with an associated measure of uncertainty, and are most effectively applied when there are multiple capture occasions. Capture-recapture ideology can be more widely applied to multiple data-sources, by the linkage of individuals across the multiple lists. This is often referred to as Multiple Systems Estimation (MSE). The MSE approach has been preferred when estimating "capture-shy" or hard-to-reach populations, including those caught up in the criminal justice system; or homeless; or trafficked; or civilian casualties of war. Motivated by a range of public policy applications of MSE, each briefly introduced, we discuss practical problems with potentially substantial methodological implications. They include: "period" definition; "case" definition; when an observed count is not a true count of the population of interest but an upper bound due to mismatched definitions; exact or probabilistic matching of "cases" across different lists; demographic or other information about the "case" which may influence capture-propensities; required permissions to access extant-lists; list-creation by research-teams or interested parties; referrals (if presence on list A results - almost surely - in presence on list B); different mathematical models leading to widely different estimated population sizes; uncertainty in estimation; computational efficiency; external validation; hypothesis-generation; and additional independent external information. Returning to our motivational applications, we focus on whether the uncertainty which qualified their estimates was sufficiently narrow to orient public policy; and, if not, what options were available and/or taken to reduce the uncertainty or to seek external validation. We also consider whether MSE was hypothesis-generating: in the sense of having spawned new lines of inquiry.

Indexed as

confidentialitydeductive disclosuredemographic factorsevidence-based policyhidden populationsquantifying uncertaintyrecord-linkage

Identifiers

PMID30046636
PMCPMC6055983

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.