ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Same ICD-10 code, different estimands: four Polish National Health Fund obesity series, 2015-2025.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Poland's National Health Fund (NFZ) publishes four national series indexed by ICD-10 code E66. Although their labels suggest related measures of obesity, differences in analytical unit, entry rule, look-back period, and temporal structure may alter both the reported level and the apparent response to healthcare-system disruption. We examined whether selecting an official NFZ E66 series materially changes the level, trend, and permissible public-health interpretation of recorded obesity-related activity. Methods: This retrospective, descriptive ecological time-series study audited 44 annual resources covering registered morbidity, first-recorded patients, annual E66 patients, and E66-coded services in 2015-2025. We analyzed counts and population-scaled administrative rates, summarized long-term change using log-linear annual percentage change (APC), and used a one-year 2020 indicator as a descriptive pandemic-era stress test. An endpoint sensitivity analysis excluded 2025. Independent BMI sources provided cross-sectional contextual triangulation for 2025. Results: In 2025, two official person-based series yielded 1,534,022 persons with a current or earlier principal E66 record and 325,769 persons with qualifying current-year E66 activity, a 4.7-fold difference arising from construction rather than alternative estimates of a single quantity. From 2015 to 2025, endpoint increases ranged from 178.1 to 332.5%, and population-scaled APCs from 10.5 to 14.5%. During 2020, the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, deviations from the fitted trend were modest for registered morbidity (-3.5%) but substantially larger for the three series requiring current-year activity (-39.4 to -44.3%). Conclusions: The same E66 code supports four distinct administrative trajectories. Their growth may reflect a genuine rise in clinical obesity together with changes in recognition, access, recording, and service delivery; the aggregates cannot separate these contributions. Explicit estimand definitions are therefore essential when NFZ indicators are used for surveillance or policy.
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.