ReviewNPJ digital medicine2024
Overcoming biases of individual level shopping history data in health research.
Review in NPJ digital medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using supermarket loyalty card data to investigate seasonal variation in laxative purchases in the UK.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Shopping Data for Population Health Surveillance: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Linking digital footprint data into longitudinal population studies.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Novel sources of population data, especially administrative and medical records, as well as the digital footprints generated through interactions with online services, present a considerable opportunity for advancing health research and policymaking. An illustrative example is shopping history records that can illuminate aspects of population health by scrutinizing extensive sets of everyday choices made in the real world. However, like any dataset, these sources possess specific limitations, including sampling biases, validity issues, and measurement errors. To enhance the applicability and potential of shopping data in health research, we advocate for the integration of individual-level shopping data with external datasets containing rich repositories of longitudinal population cohort studies. This strategic approach holds the promise of devising innovative methodologies to address inherent data limitations and biases. By meticulously documenting biases, establishing validated associations, and discerning patterns within these amalgamated records, researchers can extrapolate their findings to encompass population-wide datasets derived from national supermarket chain. The validation and linkage of population health data with real-world choices pertaining to food, beverages, and over-the-counter medications, such as pain relief, present a significant opportunity to comprehend the impact of these choices and behavioural patterns associated with them on public health.
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.