Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38365965›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2024

On the measurement of cause of death inequality.

Iñaki Permanyer, Júlia Almeida Calazans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Iñaki PermanyerCentre for Demographic Studies, Centres de Recerca de Catalunya (CERCA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7051-5144
Júlia Almeida CalazansCentre for Demographic Studies, Centres de Recerca de Catalunya (CERCA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.

Funding

European Research Council 2019-CoG-864616
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAttempts at assessing heterogeneity in countries' mortality profiles often rely on measures of cause of death (CoD) diversity. Unfortunately, such indicators fail to take into consideration the degree of (dis)similarity among pairs of causes (e.g. 'transport injuries' and 'unintentional injuries' are implicitly assumed to be as dissimilar as 'transport injuries' and 'Alzheimer's disease')-an unrealistic and unduly restrictive assumption. DEVELOPMENT: We extend diversity indicators proposing a broader class of heterogeneity measures that are sensitive to the similarity between the causes of death one works with. The so-called 'CoD inequality' measures are defined as the average expected 'dissimilarity between any two causes of death'. A strength of the approach is that such measures are decomposable, so that users can assess the contribution of each cause to overall CoD heterogeneity levels-a useful property for the evaluation of public health policies. APPLICATION: We have applied the method to 15 low-mortality countries between 1990 and 2019, using data from the Global Burden of Disease project. CoD inequality and CoD diversity generally increase over time across countries and sex, but with some exceptions. In several cases (notably, Finland), both indicators run in opposite directions.

conclusionsCoD inequality and diversity indicators capture complementary information about the heterogeneity of mortality profiles, so they should be analysed alongside other population health metrics, such as life expectancy and lifespan inequality.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseLife ExpectancyCause of DeathFinlandHumansLongevityMortalityCause of deathdissimilaritydiversityheterogeneitymortality inequalitymortality profile

Identifiers

PMID38365965
PMCPMC10873278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.