Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39350602›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2024

On the estimation of population size-A comparison of capture-recapture and multiplier-benchmark methods.

Jianing Wang, David M Kline, Laura Forsberg White

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jianing WangBiostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4709-3091
David M KlineDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Laura Forsberg WhiteDepartment of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

Spatio-temporal Methods for Surveillance of the Opioid SyndemicR01DA052214 · NIDA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI HEPLER, STACI, KLINE, DAVID M · 2021 to 2025
$3.7M
Development of a novel community-based high-performance surveillance network for drug useDP2DA051864 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI BAROCAS, JOSHUA ADAM · 2020 to 2020
$2.3M
Maximizing Investigators' Research Award (R35)R35GM141821 · NIGMS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI WHITE, LAURA FORSBERG · 2021 to 2025
$1.8M
NIDA NIH HHS DP2 DA051864NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA052214NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM141821
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approaches to population size estimation are of importance across a wide spectrum of disciplines, especially when census and simple random sampling are impractical. The capture-recapture method and the multiplier-benchmark method are two commonly used approaches that use data that partially capture the target population and overlap in a known way. Due to similarities in required data structures, the approaches are often used interchangeably without a critical appraisal of the underlying assumptions, especially in the two-sample case. Here, we describe the similarities and differences of the sampling mechanisms and assumptions underlying both approaches. We emphasize that the capture-recapture method assumes data sources as random samples and describes two-way inclusion histories, while in multiplier-benchmark method, one source captures a fixed sub-population, and the one-way inclusion histories are modeled. We also discuss the implications of these differences through simulation and real data to guide the choice of method in practice. A careful study of the data structures, relationships, and data generation processes is crucial for assessing the appropriateness of using these methods.

Indexed as

Population DensityHumansModels, Statisticalcapture-recapture methodmultiplier-benchmark methodPopulation size estimation

Identifiers

PMID39350602
PMCPMC11827169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.