如何衡量过早死亡率?结合 "相对 "和 "绝对 "方法的建议。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Population Health Metrics Pub Date : 2021-10-26 DOI:10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y
Stefano Mazzuco, Marc Suhrcke, Lucia Zanotto
{"title":"如何衡量过早死亡率?结合 \"相对 \"和 \"绝对 \"方法的建议。","authors":"Stefano Mazzuco, Marc Suhrcke, Lucia Zanotto","doi":"10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The concept of \"premature mortality\" is at the heart of many national and global health measurement and benchmarking efforts. However, despite the intuitive appeal of its underlying concept, it is far from obvious how to best operationalise it. The previous work offers at least two basic approaches: an absolute and a relative one. The former-and far more widely used- approach sets a unique age threshold (e.g. 65 years), below which deaths are defined as premature. The relative approach derives the share of premature deaths from the country-specific age distribution of deaths in the country of interest. The biggest disadvantage of the absolute approach is that of using a unique, arbitrary threshold for different mortality patterns, while the main disadvantage of the relative approach is that its estimate of premature mortality strongly depends on how the senescent deaths distribution is defined in each country.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We propose to overcome some of the downsides of the existing approaches, by combining features of both, using a hierarchical model, in which senescent deaths distribution is held constant for each country as a pivotal quantity and the premature mortality distribution is allowed to vary across countries. In this way, premature mortality estimates become more comparable across countries with similar characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proposed hierarchical models provide results, which appear to align with related evidence from  specific countries. In particular, we find a relatively high premature mortality for the United States and Denmark.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While our hybrid approach overcomes some of the problems of previous measures, some issues require further research, in particular the choice of the group of countries that a given country is assigned to and the choice of the benchmarks within the groups. Hence, our proposed method, combined with further study addressing these issues, could provide a valid alternative way to measure and compare premature mortality across countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":51476,"journal":{"name":"Population Health Metrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547117/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining \\\"relative\\\" and \\\"absolute\\\" approaches.\",\"authors\":\"Stefano Mazzuco, Marc Suhrcke, Lucia Zanotto\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The concept of \\\"premature mortality\\\" is at the heart of many national and global health measurement and benchmarking efforts. However, despite the intuitive appeal of its underlying concept, it is far from obvious how to best operationalise it. The previous work offers at least two basic approaches: an absolute and a relative one. The former-and far more widely used- approach sets a unique age threshold (e.g. 65 years), below which deaths are defined as premature. The relative approach derives the share of premature deaths from the country-specific age distribution of deaths in the country of interest. The biggest disadvantage of the absolute approach is that of using a unique, arbitrary threshold for different mortality patterns, while the main disadvantage of the relative approach is that its estimate of premature mortality strongly depends on how the senescent deaths distribution is defined in each country.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We propose to overcome some of the downsides of the existing approaches, by combining features of both, using a hierarchical model, in which senescent deaths distribution is held constant for each country as a pivotal quantity and the premature mortality distribution is allowed to vary across countries. In this way, premature mortality estimates become more comparable across countries with similar characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proposed hierarchical models provide results, which appear to align with related evidence from  specific countries. In particular, we find a relatively high premature mortality for the United States and Denmark.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While our hybrid approach overcomes some of the problems of previous measures, some issues require further research, in particular the choice of the group of countries that a given country is assigned to and the choice of the benchmarks within the groups. Hence, our proposed method, combined with further study addressing these issues, could provide a valid alternative way to measure and compare premature mortality across countries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Population Health Metrics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547117/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Population Health Metrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Population Health Metrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:过早死亡 "这一概念是许多国家和全球健康测量和基准制定工作的核心。然而,尽管其基本概念具有直观的吸引力,但如何最好地将其付诸实施却远非显而易见。以往的工作至少提供了两种基本方法:绝对方法和相对方法。前一种方法--也是使用更为广泛的一种方法--设定一个独特的年龄阈值(如 65 岁),低于该年龄阈值的死亡被定义为过早死亡。相对方法是从相关国家特定的死亡年龄分布中得出过早死亡的比例。绝对方法的最大缺点是对不同的死亡模式使用唯一的、任意的阈值,而相对方法的主要缺点是其对过早死亡的估计在很大程度上取决于每个国家如何定义衰老死亡的分布:我们建议采用分层模型来克服现有方法的一些弊端,将两者的特点结合起来,在该模型中,每个国家的衰老死亡分布作为一个关键量保持不变,而过早死亡率分布则允许在不同国家之间变化。这样,具有相似特征的国家之间的过早死亡率估计值更具可比性:所提出的分层模型得出的结果似乎与特定国家的相关证据相吻合。特别是,我们发现美国和丹麦的过早死亡率相对较高:虽然我们的混合方法克服了以往措施中的一些问题,但有些问题仍需进一步研究,特别是特定国家所属国家组的选择以及组内基准的选择。因此,我们提出的方法加上针对这些问题的进一步研究,可以为衡量和比较各国过早死亡率提供一种有效的替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining "relative" and "absolute" approaches.

Background: The concept of "premature mortality" is at the heart of many national and global health measurement and benchmarking efforts. However, despite the intuitive appeal of its underlying concept, it is far from obvious how to best operationalise it. The previous work offers at least two basic approaches: an absolute and a relative one. The former-and far more widely used- approach sets a unique age threshold (e.g. 65 years), below which deaths are defined as premature. The relative approach derives the share of premature deaths from the country-specific age distribution of deaths in the country of interest. The biggest disadvantage of the absolute approach is that of using a unique, arbitrary threshold for different mortality patterns, while the main disadvantage of the relative approach is that its estimate of premature mortality strongly depends on how the senescent deaths distribution is defined in each country.

Method: We propose to overcome some of the downsides of the existing approaches, by combining features of both, using a hierarchical model, in which senescent deaths distribution is held constant for each country as a pivotal quantity and the premature mortality distribution is allowed to vary across countries. In this way, premature mortality estimates become more comparable across countries with similar characteristics.

Results: The proposed hierarchical models provide results, which appear to align with related evidence from  specific countries. In particular, we find a relatively high premature mortality for the United States and Denmark.

Conclusions: While our hybrid approach overcomes some of the problems of previous measures, some issues require further research, in particular the choice of the group of countries that a given country is assigned to and the choice of the benchmarks within the groups. Hence, our proposed method, combined with further study addressing these issues, could provide a valid alternative way to measure and compare premature mortality across countries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Population Health Metrics
Population Health Metrics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: Population Health Metrics aims to advance the science of population health assessment, and welcomes papers relating to concepts, methods, ethics, applications, and summary measures of population health. The journal provides a unique platform for population health researchers to share their findings with the global community. We seek research that addresses the communication of population health measures and policy implications to stakeholders; this includes papers related to burden estimation and risk assessment, and research addressing population health across the full range of development. Population Health Metrics covers a broad range of topics encompassing health state measurement and valuation, summary measures of population health, descriptive epidemiology at the population level, burden of disease and injury analysis, disease and risk factor modeling for populations, and comparative assessment of risks to health at the population level. The journal is also interested in how to use and communicate indicators of population health to reduce disease burden, and the approaches for translating from indicators of population health to health-advancing actions. As a cross-cutting topic of importance, we are particularly interested in inequalities in population health and their measurement.
期刊最新文献
Deriving disability weights for the Netherlands: findings from the Dutch disability weights measurement study. Quantifying the magnitude of the general contextual effect in a multilevel study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Ontario, Canada: application of the median rate ratio in population health research. Standardised reporting of burden of disease studies: the STROBOD statement. Population age structure dependency of the excess mortality P-score. Automated mortality coding for improved health policy in the Philippines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1