Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36843016›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2023

Invited Commentary: Modern Epidemiology Confronts COVID-19-Reflections From Psychiatric Epidemiology.

Gonzalo Martínez-Alés, Katherine Keyes

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Psychiatric Epidemiology During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Current epidemiology reports · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gonzalo Martínez-Alés
Katherine Keyes
Columbia University · USHealth Net · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dimitris et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2022;191(6):980-986) outline how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has, with mixed results, put epidemiology under the spotlight. While epidemiologic theory and methods have been critical in many successes, the ongoing global death toll from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the sometimes chaotic public messaging underscore that epidemiology as a field has room for improvement. Here, we use examples from psychiatric epidemiologic studies conducted during the COVID-19 era to reflect on errors driven by overlooking specific major methodological advances of modern epidemiology. We focus on: 1) use of nonrepresentative sampling in online surveys, which limits the potential knowledge to be gained from descriptive studies and amplifies collider stratification bias in causal studies; and 2) failure to acknowledge multiple versions of exposures (e.g., lockdown, school closure) and differences in prevalence of effect measure modifiers across contexts, which causes violations of the consistency assumption and lack of effect transportability. We finish by highlighting: 1) the heterogeneity of psychiatric epidemiologic results during the pandemic across place and sociodemographic groups and over time; 2) the importance of following the foundational advancements of modern epidemiology even in emergency settings; and 3) the need to limit the role of political agendas in cherry-picking and reporting epidemiologic evidence.

Indexed as

COVID-19BiasCommunicable Disease ControlHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19epidemiologic methodsmental healthpsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID36843016
OpenAlexW4322496091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.