ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2018
Relationship between incidence and prevalence in psychotic disorders: An incidence-prevalence-mortality model.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The incidence, mortality and disease burden of cardiovascular diseases in China: a comparative study with the United States and Japan based on the GBD 2019 time trend analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Urbanicity and psychotic disorders: Facts and hypotheses.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2023Review
- Relationship between incidence and prevalence in psychotic disorders: An incidence-prevalence-mortality model.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIncidence-prevalence-mortality (IPM) models have been developped to estimate incidence or prevalence when one of these two measures is unavailable. We aimed to test the consistency of an IPM model of psychotic disorders on a recent incidence-prevalence couple dataset and to identify potential causes of inconsistency by applying the model to (a) the whole population, (b) female and male subgroups, (c) migrant subgroups, and (d) psychotic disorders with age at onset (AAO) between 18 and 24 (18-24 AAO).
methodsWe modelled prevalence (MP) using incidence data and the expected mortality and remission values. We then compared the MP to the observed prevalence (OP).
resultsIn the whole population, the model significantly underestimated the prevalence (MP = 3.30, 95% CI [2.97, 3.66]; OP = 4.98, 95% CI [4.58, 5.41]). The results were similar for the two genders. In the migrants group, results were in the opposite direction, the model significantly overestimating the prevalence. Finally, in the 18-24 AAO subgroup, the model performed well, with OP and MP not significantly different.
conclusionThese results suggest that standard IPM models do not perform well for psychotic disorders and more complex models taking into account the heterogeneity of the sample (in terms of remission, mortality, population movements, etc.) need to be developed.
Indexed as
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.