ArticlePloS one2021
The impact of errors in medical certification on the accuracy of the underlying cause of death.
Article in PloS one, 2021. 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, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temporal Trends and Demographic Disparities in Respiratory Failure Mortality Among Adults with Chronic Liver Disease: A National Mortality Database Analysis, 1999 to 2024.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Trends in cardiovascular disease mortality among older adults with co-occuring lung cancer in the United States from 1999 to 2020.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Comparison of all-cause and cause-specific mortality after myocardial infarction - a Hungarian registry study.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Disaggregation of Hepatobiliary Cancer Mortality Among Asian Americans: Analysis of NVSS Mortality Data.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Death registration and certification in Ghana.Ghana medical journal · 2025Article
- Mortality trends in Kazakhstan: insights from a million of deaths from 2014 to 2022.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Improving the Documentation of Causes of Death Certificates Based on the International Classification of Diseases Perinatal Mortality (ICD-PM): The Impact of a Mixed Method Approach.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Global disparities in the burden of pancreatic cancer (1990-2021): insights from the 2021 Global Burden of Disease study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Challenges facing physicians in death certification of under-five mortality in Egypt.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- A scoping review on the errors in medical certification of the cause of death in India.The Indian journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Assessment of the Quality of Cause-of-Death Data in Serbia for 2005-2019 Vital Statistics Performance Index Estimation.Iranian journal of public health · 2024Article
- Automated coding and selection of causes of death in Peru: a descriptive study, 2016-2019.Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil · 2023Article
- Medical Students' Knowledge of the Cause-of-Death Certification: A Descriptive, Cross-Sectional Study from Saudi Arabia.International journal of general medicine · 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
12 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCorrect certification of cause of death by physicians (i.e. completing the medical certificate of cause of death or MCCOD) and correct coding according to International Classification of Diseases (ICD) rules are essential to produce quality mortality statistics to inform health policy. Despite clear guidelines, errors in medical certification are common. This study objectively measures the impact of different medical certification errors upon the selection of the underlying cause of death.
methodsA sample of 1592 error-free MCCODs were selected from the 2017 United States multiple cause of death data. The ten most common types of errors in completing the MCCOD (according to published studies) were individually simulated on the error-free MCCODs. After each simulation, the MCCODs were coded using Iris automated mortality coding software. Chance-corrected concordance (CCC) was used to measure the impact of certification errors on the underlying cause of death. Weights for each error type and Socio-demographic Index (SDI) group (representing different mortality conditions) were calculated from the CCC and categorised (very high, high, medium and low) to describe their effect on cause of death accuracy.
findingsThe only very high impact error type was reporting an ill-defined condition as the underlying cause of death. High impact errors were found to be reporting competing causes in Part 1 [of the death certificate] and illegibility, with medium impact errors being reporting underlying cause in Part 2 [of the death certificate], incorrect or absent time intervals and reporting contributory causes in Part 1, and low impact errors comprising multiple causes per line and incorrect sequence. There was only small difference in error importance between SDI groups.
conclusionsReporting an ill-defined condition as the underlying cause of death can seriously affect the coding outcome, while other certification errors were mitigated through the correct application of mortality coding rules. Training of physicians in not reporting ill-defined conditions on the MCCOD and mortality coders in correct coding practices and using Iris should be important components of national strategies to improve cause of death data quality.
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.