ReviewJMIR public health and surveillance2022
Development and Validation of Indicators for Population Injury Surveillance in Hong Kong: Development and Usability Study.
Review in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction and results of a comprehensive index for gastrointestinal health monitoring in China: a nationwide study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInjury is an increasingly pressing global health issue. An effective surveillance system is required to monitor the trends and burden of injuries.
objectiveThis study aimed to identify a set of valid and context-specific injury indicators to facilitate the establishment of an injury surveillance program in Hong Kong.
methodsThis development of indicators adopted a multiphased modified Delphi research design. A literature search was conducted on academic databases using injury-related search terms in various combinations. A list of potential indicators was sent to a panel of experts from various backgrounds to rate the validity and context-specificity of these indicators. Local hospital data on the selected core indicators were used to examine their applicability in the context of Hong Kong.
resultsWe reviewed 142 articles and identified 55 indicators, which were classified into 4 domains. On the basis of the ratings by the expert panel, 13 indicators were selected as core indicators because of their good validity and high relevance to the local context. Among these indicators, 10 were from the construct of health care service use, and 3 were from the construct of postdischarge outcomes. Regression analyses of local hospitalization data showed that the Hong Kong Safe Community certification status had no association with 5 core indicators (admission to intensive care unit, mortality rate, length of intensive care unit stay, need for a rehabilitation facility, and long-term behavioral and emotional outcomes), negative associations with 4 core indicators (operative intervention, infection rate, length of hospitalization, and disability-adjusted life years), and positive associations with the remaining 4 core indicators (attendance to accident and emergency department, discharge rate, suicide rate, and hospitalization rate after attending the accident and emergency department). These results confirmed the validity of the selected core indicators for the quantification of injury burden and evaluation of injury-related services, although some indicators may better measure the consequences of severe injuries.
conclusionsThis study developed a set of injury outcome indicators that would be useful for monitoring injury trends and burdens in Hong Kong.
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.