ArticleEuropean journal of public health2024
Metrological performances of the global chronic morbidity indicator of the Minimum European Health Module and implications for chronic disease prevalence and socioeconomic gradient estimations.
Article in European journal of public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the global chronic morbidity indicator (GCMI) of the Minimum European Health Module (MEHM) was not specifically designed to monitor chronic disease in the population, it is increasingly used for this purpose in Europe and elsewhere. However, its metrological characteristics have seldom been examined, with various sensitivity issues being raised. The present study investigated the metrological performances of the GCMI and analyzed its implications in terms of prevalence and demographic and socioeconomic gradients of chronic conditions in the population.
methodsWe used data from two large French nationwide representative surveys with cross-sectional and longitudinal data conducted between 2010 and 2021. The surveys used MEHM and collected data on numerous chronic conditions and socioeconomic indicators. Criterion and predictive validity of the GCMI regarding chronic conditions and the resultant socioeconomic gradients were compared with indicators based on reports of individual chronic conditions.
resultsGCMI sensitivity to capture chronic conditions varied from <20 to 80% depending on the chronic condition. Number of chronic conditions, gender, age and education were also associated with GCMI endorsement. However, the GCMI was predictive of mortality and activity limitations independently of individual conditions.
conclusionThe varying lack of sensitivity depending on the chronic condition and the respondent's sociodemographic status may bias estimates of demographic and socioeconomic gradients compared with indicators based on reports of individual chronic conditions. Differences between GCMI and list-based approaches should be more cautiously considered when monitoring chronic conditions in the population. These approaches should be viewed as complementary rather than contradictory or interchangeable.
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.