ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2024
Validation of a complex needs indicator for veterans in the UK using a composite indicators' method.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving early intervention: identifying risk factors for UK military veterans that access military charities-a case-control study and an AI-powered predictive model.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Developing a nationwide registry of UK veterans seeking help from sector charities-a machine learning approach to stratification.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Improving Cancer Screening Program Evaluation Through Principal Component Analysis-Driven Composite Indicators: Evidence From Lombardy, Italy.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To construct an indicator for assessing the complexity of UK veterans' needs. Study design: Cross-sectional, secondary analysis. Methods: The study applied principal component (PCA) analysis as the method to determine the weights of different needs based on their interactions with each other, the effectiveness of the model was evaluated using bootstrapping. The dataset on UK veterans' support provided by the "Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Associations" (SSAFA) (N = 35,208) was considered. The grant applications for different categories of support were used as indicators of different needs. The dimensions of breadth (number of different needs) and depth (number of grant applications to address the need) were incorporated in the assessment of complexity. Results: The complex needs indicator for the current sample was validated. The majority of cases had a complexity score of 1 or less. Conclusions: The research suggested and tested an assessment method for the complexity of veterans' needs, that may be positively associated with higher risk of adverse health outcomes. This indicator can be used by decision-makers for risk stratification of the veteran population, thus supporting the allocation of resources in a more effective way.
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.