ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024
Overcoming denominator problems in refugee settings with fragmented electronic records for health and immigration data: a prediction-based approach.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Last mile at the center of immunization delivery.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEpidemiological studies in refugee settings are often challenged by the denominator problem, i.e. lack of population at risk data. We develop an empirical approach to address this problem by assessing relationships between occupancy data in refugee centres, number of refugee patients in walk-in clinics, and diseases of the digestive system.
methodsIndividual-level patient data from a primary care surveillance system (PriCarenet) was matched with occupancy data retrieved from immigration authorities. The three relationships were analysed using regression models, considering age, sex, and type of centre. Then predictions for the respective data category not available in each of the relationships were made. Twenty-one German on-site health care facilities in state-level registration and reception centres participated in the study, covering the time period from November 2017 to July 2021.
results445 observations ("centre-months") for patient data from electronic health records (EHR, 230 mean walk-in clinics visiting refugee patients per month and centre; standard deviation sd: 202) of a total of 47.617 refugee patients were available, 215 for occupancy data (OCC, mean occupancy of 348 residents, sd: 287), 147 for both (matched), leaving 270 observations without occupancy (EHR-unmatched) and 40 without patient data (OCC-unmatched). The incidence of diseases of the digestive system, using patients as denominators in the different sub-data sets were 9.2% (sd: 5.9) in EHR, 8.8% (sd: 5.1) when matched, 9.6% (sd: 6.4) in EHR- and 12% (sd 2.9) in OCC-unmatched. Using the available or predicted occupancy as denominator yielded average incidence estimates (per centre and month) of 4.7% (sd: 3.2) in matched data, 4.8% (sd: 3.3) in EHR- and 7.4% (sd: 2.7) in OCC-unmatched.
conclusionsBy modelling the ratio between patient and occupancy numbers in refugee centres depending on sex and age, as well as on the total number of patients or occupancy, the denominator problem in health monitoring systems could be mitigated. The approach helped to estimate the missing component of the denominator, and to compare disease frequency across time and refugee centres more accurately using an empirically grounded prediction of disease frequency based on demographic and centre typology. This avoided over-estimation of disease frequency as opposed to the use of patients as denominators.
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.