ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023
Robust estimation of dementia prevalence from two-phase surveys with non-responders via propensity score stratification.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncovering the extent of dementia prevalence in Iran: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMissing diagnoses are common in cross-sectional studies of dementia, and this missingness is usually related to whether the respondent has dementia or not. Failure to properly address this issue can lead to underestimation of prevalence. To obtain accurate prevalence estimates, we propose different estimation methods within the framework of propensity score stratification (PSS), which can significantly reduce the negative impact of non-response on prevalence estimates.
methodsTo obtain accurate estimates of dementia prevalence, we calculated the propensity score (PS) of each participant to be a non-responder using logistic regression with demographic information, cognitive tests and physical function variables as covariates. We then divided all participants into five equal-sized strata based on their PS. The stratum-specific prevalence of dementia was estimated using simple estimation (SE), regression estimation (RE), and regression estimation with multiple imputation (REMI). These stratum-specific estimates were integrated to obtain an overall estimate of dementia prevalence.
resultsThe estimated prevalence of dementia using SE, RE, and REMI with PSS was 12.24%, 12.28%, and 12.20%, respectively. These estimates showed higher consistency than the estimates obtained without PSS, which were 11.64%, 12.33%, and 11.98%, respectively. Furthermore, considering only the observed diagnoses, the prevalence in the same group was found to be 9.95%, which is significantly lower than the prevalence estimated by our proposed method. This suggested that prevalence estimates obtained without properly accounting for missing data might underestimate the true prevalence.
conclusionEstimating the prevalence of dementia using the PSS provides a more robust and less biased estimate.
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.