ArticleBMC public health2024
Validity of the Chinese multimorbidity-weighted index in measuring disease burden using health check-ups data in primary care.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Serum creatinine to cystatin C ratio and risk of incident digestive diseases in middle-aged and older adults: a prospective national cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional study on associated factors of Chinese herbal medicine use in middle-aged and older adults with dyslipidaemia.Scientific reports · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs multimorbidity becomes common that imposes a considerable burden to patients, but the extent to which widely-used multimorbidity indexes can be applied to quantify disease burden using primary care data in China is not clear. We applied the Chinese Multimorbidity-Weighted Index (CMWI) to health check-ups data routinely collected among older adults by primary care, to examine its validity in measuring multimorbidity associated risks of disability and mortality in annual follow-ups.
methodsThe study utilized data from annual health check-ups of older adults, which included information on individual age, sex, and 14 health conditions at primary care in a district of Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. The risk of CMWI for mortality was analysed in a total sample of 45,009 persons 65 years and older between 2014 and 2020 (average 2.70-year follow-up), and the risk for disability was in a subsample of 18,320 older adults free of physical impairment in 2019 and followed-up in 2020. Risk of death and disability were assessed with Cox proportional hazard regression and binary logistic regression, respectively, with both models adjusted for age and sex variables. The model fit was assessed by the Akaike information criterion (AIC), and C-statistic or the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
resultsOne unit increase in baseline-CMWI (Median= 1.70, IQR: 1.30-3.00) was associated with higher risk in subsequent disability (OR = 1.12, 95%CI = 1.05,1.20) and mortality (OR = 1.18, 95%CI = 1.14, 1.22). Participants in the top tertile of CMWI had 99% and 152% increased risks of disability and mortality than their counterparts in the bottom tertile. Model fit was satisfied with adequate AUC (0.84) or C-statistic (0.76) for both outcomes.
conclusionsCMWI, calculated based on primary care's routine health check-ups data, provides valid estimates of disability and mortality risks in older adults. This validated tool can be used to quantity and monitor older patients' health risks in primary care.
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.