Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38229939›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of methodology2023

Using national census data to facilitate healthcare research.

Michael Colwill, Andrew Poullis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Michael ColwillDepartment of Gastroenterology, St George's Hospital London, London SW17 0QT, United Kingdom. michael.colwill@nhs.net.
Andrew PoullisDepartment of Gastroenterology, St George's Hospital London, London SW17 0QT, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

National censuses are conducted at varying intervals across both the developed and developing world and collect detailed data on a wide range of societal, economic and health questions. This immense volume of data has many potential uses in the field of healthcare research and can be utilised either in isolation or in conjunction with other information sources such as hospital records. At a governmental level census data can be used for healthcare service planning by providing accurate population density information but also, through the use of more detailed data collection, by helping to identify high-risk populations that may require increased resource allocation. It can also be a key tool in addressing and improving healthcare inequality and deprivation by both identifying those populations with poorer healthcare outcomes and through helping researchers to better understand the causes of this inequality. Similarly, it has utility when studying the complex causes of disease and assessing the success of strategies designed to tackle these aetiologies. However, the maximum benefit from these various uses can only be realised if the data collection and analysis processes utilised are robust and this requires that census bureaus regularly review and modify their methods in a transparent and thorough way.

Indexed as

Census dataEpidemiologyMethodology

Identifiers

PMID38229939
PMCPMC10789110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.