Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40815060›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2025

Impact of Washout Duration to Account for Left Truncation in Register-based Epidemiologic Studies: Estimating the Risk of Mental Disorders.

Oleguer Plana-Ripoll, Natalie C Momen, Dídac Gallego-Alabanda, Danni Chen, Stefan Nygaard Hansen, Guadalupe Gómez Melis, Carsten Bøcker Pedersen, Esben Agerbo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Life Has a Left Truncation Problem.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
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

8 authors.

Oleguer Plana-RipollFrom the Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6470-7465
Natalie C MomenFrom the Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Dídac Gallego-AlabandaDepartment of Statistics and Operations Research, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTECH, Barcelona, Spain.
Danni ChenFrom the Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Stefan Nygaard HansenDepartment of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Guadalupe Gómez MelisDepartment of Statistics and Operations Research, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTECH, Barcelona, Spain.
Carsten Bøcker PedersenNational Centre for Register-based Research, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Esben AgerboNational Centre for Register-based Research, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Mental DisordersRegistriesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiasChildChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesDenmarkEpidemiologic StudiesFemaleHumansIncidenceInfantElectronic healthcare recordsLeft truncationMental disordersRegister-based epidemiologyWashout periods

Identifiers

PMID40815060
PMCPMC13166074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.