ArticleHealth promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice2026
Misclassification bias in chronic disease case ascertainment algorithms: a reclassification approach.
Article in Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUse of administrative health data to identify chronic disease cases can cause misclassification bias. Reclassification-based exit rules may reduce misclassification bias.
methodsManitoban administrative health data (1995-2022) were used to ascertain multiple sclerosis (MS) and "juvenile diabetes" (JD) prevalence. We constructed multivariable logistic regression model-based algorithms and used a model-predicted probability exit rule to reclassify JD and MS case status annually. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and reclassification rates were estimated. Linear regression tested for differences in prevalence estimates for the model-based algorithm with an exit rule and an existing Canadian Chronic Disease Surveillance System (CCDSS) algorithm without an exit rule.
resultsThe MS cohort included 60 228 individuals (608 cases, 59 620 non-cases) and the JD cohort 44 125 individuals (2506 cases, 41 619 non-cases). Model-based algorithm sensitivity was 0.62 to 0.85 for MS and 0.87 to 0.95 for JD. PPV for MS was 0.21 to 0.60 and for JD was 0.92 to 0.95. Specificity and NPV were consistently high (0.98-1.00). Non-cases were frequently misclassified; reclassification rates for non-cases were higher than for cases for MS (0.22-0.33 vs. 0.14-0.28) and JD (0.18-0.65 vs. 0.13-0.15). The model-based algorithm with an exit rule for MS, but not for JD, had a slower increase in prevalence than the CCDSS algorithm.
conclusionCase ascertainment algorithms with an exit rule can address misclassification bias when estimating chronic disease prevalence using administrative health data. Improvements are disease dependent.
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.