ArticleJournal of survey statistics and methodology2024
Real World Data Versus Probability Surveys for Estimating Health Conditions at the State Level.
Article in Journal of survey statistics and methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Government statistical offices worldwide are under pressure to produce statistics rapidly and for more detailed geographies, to compete with unofficial estimates available from web-based big data sources or from private companies. Commonly suggested sources of improved health information are electronic health records (EHRs) and medical claims data. These data sources are collectively known as real world data (RWD) because they are generated from routine health care processes, and they are available for millions of patients. It is clear that RWD can provide estimates that are more timely and less expensive to produce- but a key question is whether or not they are very accurate. To test this, we took advantage of a unique health data source that includes a full range of sociodemographic variables and compare estimates using all of those potential weighting variables, versus estimates derived when only age and sex are available for weighting (as is common with most RWD sources). We show that not accounting for other variables can produce misleading, and quite inaccurate, health estimates.
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.