ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2026
Assessing the generalizability of prevalence estimates from the All of Us Research Program.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mental Health Utilization Gap by Insurance Type Among US Adults With Chronic Pain.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Association of GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Prescriptions and Alcohol Consumption in the National Institutes of Health's All of Us Cohort.Alcohol, clinical & experimental research · 2026Article
- Association of GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Prescriptions and Alcohol Consumption in the National Institutes of Health'smedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The National Institutes of Health's All of Us Research Program (All of Us) aims to enhance precision medicine by collecting multimodal data from 1 million or more participants. Because All of Us prioritizes enrollment from populations for which there is limited data on health outcomes using nonprobability sampling methods, prevalence estimates may not reflect those of the general US population. This study examines the challenges of estimating electronic health record-based disease prevalence from All of Us and offers a framework and novel R package (waou) to help researchers consider these complex issues. We investigated the application of 3 weighting techniques to improve generalizability for dementia, type 2 diabetes, and depression prevalence estimates. Using data from All of Us alongside the National Health Interview Survey as a benchmark, we found that weighting approaches yielded more representative estimates for dementia and type 2 diabetes, yet amplified bias for depression. The waou is presented as a tool to facilitate the application of these methodologies, empowering researchers to critically evaluate the generalizability of their estimates. This work underscores the need for careful consideration of bias in epidemiological research when using the All of Us dataset for population-level inferences.
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.