Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31908777›Full record

ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2020

How do world and European standard populations impact burden of disease studies? A case study of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in Scotland.

Grant M A Wyper, Ian Grant, Eilidh Fletcher, Gerry McCartney, Colin Fischbacher, Diane L Stockton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Epidemiology of small intestine cancer in Iran.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Recommendations to plan a national burden of disease study.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Reflections on key methodological decisions in national burden of disease assessments.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2020
    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

6 authors.

Grant M A WyperPublic Health Science Directorate, NHS Health Scotland, Meridian Court, 5 Cadogan Street, Glasgow, G2 6QE Scotland.ORCID 0000-0003-2854-5822
Ian Grant2Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Gyle Square, 1 South Gyle Crescent, Edinburgh, EH12 9EB Scotland.
Eilidh Fletcher2Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Gyle Square, 1 South Gyle Crescent, Edinburgh, EH12 9EB Scotland.
Gerry McCartneyPublic Health Science Directorate, NHS Health Scotland, Meridian Court, 5 Cadogan Street, Glasgow, G2 6QE Scotland.
Colin Fischbacher2Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Gyle Square, 1 South Gyle Crescent, Edinburgh, EH12 9EB Scotland.
Diane L StocktonPublic Health Science Directorate, NHS Health Scotland, Meridian Court, 5 Cadogan Street, Glasgow, G2 6QE Scotland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDisability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) are an established method for quantifying population health needs and guiding prioritisation decisions. Global Burden of Disease (GBD) estimates aim to ensure comparability between countries and over time by using age-standardised rates (ASR) to account for differences in the age structure of different populations. Different standard populations are used for this purpose but it is not widely appreciated that the choice of standard may affect not only the resulting rates but also the rankings of causes of DALYs. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the choice of standard, using the example of Scotland.

methodsDALY estimates were derived from the 2016 Scottish Burden of Disease (SBoD) study for an abridged list of 68 causes of disease/injury, representing a three-year annual average across 2014-16. Crude DALY rates were calculated using Scottish national population estimates. DALY ASRs standardised using the GBD World Standard Population (GBD WSP) were compared to those using the 2013 European Standard Population (ESP2013). Differences in ASR and in rank order within the cause list were summarised for all-cause and for each individual cause.

resultsThe ranking of causes by DALYs were similar using crude rates or ASR (ESP2013). All-cause DALY rates using ASR (GBD WSP) were around 26% lower. Overall 58 out of 68 causes had a lower ASR using GBD WSP compared with ESP2013, with the largest falls occurring for leading causes of mortality observed in older ages. Gains in ASR were much smaller in absolute scale and largely affected causes that operated early in life. These differences were associated with a substantial change to the ranking of causes when GBD WSP was used compared with ESP2013.

conclusionDisease rankings based on DALY ASRs are strongly influenced by the choice of standard population. While GBD WSP offers international comparability, within-country analyses based on DALY ASRs should reflect local age structures. For European countries, including Scotland, ESP2013 may better guide local priority setting by avoiding large disparities occurring between crude and age-standardised results sets, which could potentially confuse non-technical audiences.

Indexed as

Age standardisationBurden of diseaseDALYEuropean standard populationSBODSummary measures of population health, GBDWorld standard populationYLDYLL

Identifiers

PMID31908777
PMCPMC6941317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.