ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Impact of Washout Duration to Account for Left Truncation in Register-based Epidemiologic Studies: Estimating the Risk of Mental Disorders.
Article in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changes in incidence of hospital diagnoses of mental disorders among children and adolescents over the past 3 decades.BMJ mental health · 2026Article
- Absolute risk of acquired brain injury and rehabilitation needs in Denmark, 2014-2023: a population-based prospective cohort study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Psychiatric Disorders Among Fathers in Sweden Before, During, and After Partner Pregnancy.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Multimorbidity trends in Catalonia, 2010-21: a population-based cohort study.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Life Has a Left Truncation Problem.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Mental Disorders in Danish Hospital Registers: A Review of Content and Possibilities for Epidemiological Research.Clinical epidemiology · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncidence rates and cumulative incidences estimated using registers (e.g., electronic healthcare records) might be biased by including cases diagnosed before the inception of the register as being at risk. Washout periods can identify and exclude prevalent cases from analyses, but the impact of washout duration on estimates is unknown. We estimated risks of mental disorders according to different washout period durations.
methodsThis population-based cohort included all 6,478,162 individuals aged 1-80 years living in Denmark in 2010-2021. Using hospital contacts in 2010-2021, we estimated incidence rates and cumulative incidence of mental disorders according to different washout period durations (0, 1, 2, 5, 15, and 41 years) based on hospital contacts prior to 2010.
resultsWithout a washout period, the lifetime cumulative incidence of any mental disorder was 49.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 49.2%, 49.5%) for females and 45.1% (95% CI: 45.0%, 45.2%) for males. Estimates decreased when we increased the washout, reaching a lifetime incidence of 40.3% (95% CI: 40.1%, 40.4%) for females and 36.6% (95% CI: 36.5%, 36.8%) for males when using all available data (41 years of washout). Without a washout period, estimates for specific mental disorder types were up to 60% higher than those obtained with the maximum washout period, but the bias in absolute terms depended on the underlying risks.
conclusionsWhile including all cases identifiable in a register may decrease uncertainty, the inclusion of prevalent cases as being at risk may lead to substantially overestimated measures. We highlight the need for caution when using administrative registers and electronic healthcare databases.
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.