ArticlePreventive medicine reports2024
Weighting the United States
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Mental Health Utilization Gap by Insurance Type Among US Adults With Chronic Pain.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Assessing the generalizability of prevalence estimates from the All of Us Research Program.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Global approaches to infectious disease surveillance and modeling.Nature medicine · 2026Review
- Characterizing Social Determinants of Health in GI Cancer Surgery: Insights From the All of Us Research Program.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Clinical Profiles of Biobank-Linked and Non-Biobank Patients with Liver Cancer: An Exploratory Analysis Using Nationwide Cancer Registry and Claims Data.Clinical epidemiology · 2026Article
- U.S. public perceptions on whether risk of dementia and stroke can be modified through maintaining or changing lifestyle.BMC public health · 2025Article
- A user-driven consent platform for health data sharing in digital health applications.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Time to use large-scale biobank databases in health policy and public health research.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Weighting health-related estimates in the GCAT cohort and the general population of Catalonia.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Explainable machine learning for health disparities: type 2 diabetes in thebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Use of calibration to improve the precision of estimates obtained from All of Us data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
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
Background: The Research design: We developed raked weights using demographic, health, and socioeconomic variables available in both the 2020 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and Subjects: The sample included 100,391 Results: Final variables in the raking procedure included age, sex, race/ethnicity, region of residence, annual household income, and home ownership. The mean percentage difference between known proportions obtained from the NHIS and Conclusions: Raking improved the comparability of prevalence estimates obtained from
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.