Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36719759›Full record

ReviewEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2023

Analysis of Multiple Causes of Death: A Review of Methods and Practices.

Karen Bishop, Saliu Balogun, James Eynstone-Hinkins, Lauren Moran, Melonie Martin, Emily Banks, Chalapati Rao, Grace Joshy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Reclassification and weighting of multiple causes of death: US death certificates 2003-2023.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Karen BishopFrom the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University.
Saliu BalogunFrom the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University.ORCID 0000-0001-6415-5536
James Eynstone-HinkinsAustralian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, Australia.
Lauren MoranAustralian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, Australia.
Melonie MartinFrom the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University.ORCID 0000-0002-9408-3470
Emily BanksFrom the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University.ORCID 0000-0002-4617-1302
Chalapati RaoFrom the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University.ORCID 0000-0002-9554-0581
Grace JoshyFrom the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University.ORCID 0000-0002-0718-6368

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch and reporting of mortality indicators typically focus on a single underlying cause of death selected from multiple causes recorded on a death certificate. The need to incorporate the multiple causes in mortality statistics-reflecting increasing multimorbidity and complex causation patterns-is recognized internationally. This review aims to identify and appraise relevant analytical methods and practices related to multiple causes.

methodsWe searched Medline, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from their incept ion to December 2020 without language restrictions, supplemented by consultation with international experts. Eligible articles analyzed multiple causes of death from death certificates. The process identified 4,080 items of which we reviewed 434 full-text articles.

resultsMost articles we reviewed (76%, n = 332) were published since 2001. The majority of articles examined mortality by "any- mention" of the cause of death (87%, n = 377) and assessed pairwise combinations of causes (57%, n = 245). Since 2001, applications of methods emerged to group deaths based on common cause patterns using, for example, cluster analysis (2%, n = 9), and application of multiple-cause weights to re-evaluate mortality burden (1%, n = 5). We describe multiple-cause methods applied to specific research objectives for approaches emerging recently.

conclusionThis review confirms rapidly increasing international interest in the analysis of multiple causes of death and provides the most comprehensive overview, to our knowledge, of methods and practices to date. Available multiple-cause methods are diverse but suit a range of research objectives. With greater availability of data and technology, these could be further developed and applied across a range of settings.

Indexed as

Cause of DeathCluster AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMultimorbidity

Identifiers

PMID36719759
PMCPMC10069753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.