Comparison of surveillance-based metrics for the assessment and monitoring of disease detection: simulation study about type 2 diabetes

被引:3
作者
Brinks, Ralph [1 ,2 ]
Hoyer, Annika [1 ]
Rolka, Deborah B. [3 ]
Kuss, Oliver [1 ,4 ]
Gregg, Edward W. [3 ]
机构
[1] Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Leibniz Inst Diabet Res, Inst Epidemiol & Biometry, German Diabet Ctr, Hennekamp 65, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[2] Heinrich Heine Univ Dusseldorf, Univ Hosp, Hiller Res Unit Rheumatol, Moorenstr 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[3] Ctr Dis Control & Prevent, Div Diabet Translat, Atlanta, GA USA
[4] German Ctr Diabet Res DZD, Munich, Germany
关键词
Compartment model; Incidence; Prevalence; Diabetes; Chronic disease; Undiagnosed disease; Case-finding; Screening; PREVALENCE; TRENDS; HYPERTENSION; ADULTS; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1186/s12874-017-0328-2
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Screening and detection of cases are a common public health priority for treatable chronic conditions with long subclinical periods. However, the validity of commonly-used metrics from surveillance systems for rates of detection (or case-finding) have not been evaluated. Methods: Using data from a Danish diabetes register and a recently developed illness-death model of chronic diseases with subclinical conditions, we simulate two scenarios of different performance of case-finding. We report different epidemiological indices to assess case-finding in both scenarios and compare the validity of the results. Results: The commonly used ratio of detected cases over total cases may lead to misleading conclusions. Instead, the ratio of undetected cases over persons without a diagnosis is a more valid index to distinguish the quality of case-finding. However, incidence-based measures are preferable to prevalence based indicators. Conclusion: Prevalence-based indices for assessing case-finding should be interpreted with caution. If possible, incidence-based indices should be preferred.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2001, HDB 1 ORDER PARTIAL
[2]   Undiagnosed hypertension and hypercholesterolemia among uninsured and insured adults in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey [J].
Ayanian, JZ ;
Zaslavsky, AM ;
Weissman, JS ;
Schneider, EC ;
Ginsburg, JA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2003, 93 (12) :2051-2054
[3]   Social Epidemiology of Hypertension in Middle-Income Countries: Determinants of Prevalence, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Control in the WHO SAGE Study [J].
Basu, Sanjay ;
Millett, Christopher .
HYPERTENSION, 2013, 62 (01) :18-26
[4]   Comparing risk profiles of individuals diagnosed with diabetes by OGTT and HbA1cThe Danish Inter99 study [J].
Borg, R. ;
Vistisen, D. ;
Witte, D. R. ;
Borch-Johnsen, K. .
DIABETIC MEDICINE, 2010, 27 (08) :906-910
[5]   New measurable indicator for tuberculosis case detection [J].
Borgdorff, MW .
EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2004, 10 (09) :1523-1528
[6]   Development and demonstration of a state model for the estimation of incidence of partly undetected chronic diseases [J].
Brinks, Ralph ;
Bardenheier, Barbara H. ;
Hoyer, Annika ;
Lin, Ji ;
Landwehr, Sandra ;
Gregg, Edward W. .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2015, 15
[7]   The Danish National Diabetes Register: trends in incidence, prevalence and mortality [J].
Carstensen, B. ;
Kristensen, J. K. ;
Ottosen, P. ;
Borch-Johnsen, K. .
DIABETOLOGIA, 2008, 51 (12) :2187-2196
[8]  
Clair PS, 2011, TECHNICAL REPORT
[9]   Chronic kidney disease awareness, prevalence, and trends among US adults, 1999 to 2000 [J].
Coresh, J ;
Byrd-Holt, D ;
Astor, BC ;
Briggs, JP ;
Eggers, PW ;
Lacher, DA ;
Hostetter, TH .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY, 2005, 16 (01) :180-188
[10]  
Dahlquist G., 1974, NUMERICAL METHODS