Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39620120›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of population data science2024

Trend control charts for multiple sclerosis case definitions.

Naomi C Hamm, Ruth Ann Marrie, Depeng Jiang, Pourang Irani, Lisa M Lix

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of population data science, 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

5 authors.

Naomi C HammDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Ruth Ann MarrieDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Depeng JiangDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Pourang IraniDepartment of Computer Science, Mathematics, Physics and Statistics, Irving K. Barber Faculty of Science, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada.
Lisa M LixDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The validity of chronic disease case definitions for administrative health data may change over time due to changes in data quality. Trend control charts to identify out-of-control (OOC; i.e., unexpected) observations in a time series may indicate where disease estimates are influenced by changes in data quality. Objective: Apply and compare trend control charts methods for multiple sclerosis (MS) incidence and prevalence estimates using previously-validated case definitions for Manitoba, Canada. Methods: Eight case definitions were identified from published literature and applied to Manitoba administrative health data from January 1, 1972 to December 31, 2018. Incidence and prevalence trends were modeled using negative binomial and generalized estimating equation models, respectively. Trend control charts were used to plot predicted case counts against observed case counts. Control limits to identify OOC observations were calculated using two methods: predicted case count ±0.8*standard deviation (0.8*SD) and predicted case count ±2*standard deviation (2*SD). Differences in proportion of OOC observations across case definitions was assessed using McNemar's test. Results: The proportion of OOC observations ranged from 0.71 to 0.90 for incidence and 0.72 to 0.98 for prevalence when using the 0.8*SD control limits. A lower proportion of OOC observations (0.46 to 0.74 for incidence; 0.30 to 0.74 for prevalence) was observed for the 2*SD control limits. Neither method resulted in significant differences in OOC observations across case definitions. Conclusions: The proportion of OOC observations in trend control charts varied with the control limit method adopted, but statistical significance did not. Trend control charts are a potentially useful tool for developing surveillance methods, but may benefit from disease-specific calibrated control limits.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisData AccuracyHumansIncidenceManitobaPrevalencecontrol chartsincidence trendsInternational Classification of Diseasesmultiple sclerosisprevalence trends

Identifiers

PMID39620120
PMCPMC11606511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.