Research ExplorerPublicationsA comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on ...

A comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on multimorbidity require cautious interpretation when drawn from a single database

Standard

A comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on multimorbidity require cautious interpretation when drawn from a single database. / Bussche van den, Hendrik; Schäfer, Ingmar; Wiese, Birgitt; Dahlhaus, Anne; Fuchs, Angela; Gensichen, Jochen; Höfels, Susanne; Hansen, Heike; Leicht, Hanna; Koller, Daniela; Luppa, Melanie; Nützel, Anna; Werle, Jochen; Scherer, Martin; Wegscheider, Karl; Glaeske, Gerd; Schön, Gerhard.

In: J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, Vol. 66, No. 2, 2, 2013, p. 209-217.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Bussche van den, H, Schäfer, I, Wiese, B, Dahlhaus, A, Fuchs, A, Gensichen, J, Höfels, S, Hansen, H, Leicht, H, Koller, D, Luppa, M, Nützel, A, Werle, J, Scherer, M, Wegscheider, K, Glaeske, G & Schön, G 2013, 'A comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on multimorbidity require cautious interpretation when drawn from a single database', J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, vol. 66, no. 2, 2, pp. 209-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.07.019

APA

Bussche van den, H., Schäfer, I., Wiese, B., Dahlhaus, A., Fuchs, A., Gensichen, J., Höfels, S., Hansen, H., Leicht, H., Koller, D., Luppa, M., Nützel, A., Werle, J., Scherer, M., Wegscheider, K., Glaeske, G., & Schön, G. (2013). A comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on multimorbidity require cautious interpretation when drawn from a single database. J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, 66(2), 209-217. [2]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.07.019

Vancouver

Bussche van den H, Schäfer I, Wiese B, Dahlhaus A, Fuchs A, Gensichen J et al. A comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on multimorbidity require cautious interpretation when drawn from a single database. J CLIN EPIDEMIOL. 2013;66(2):209-217. 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.07.019

Bibtex

@article{f880f580045f45a9a654d6b411191f02,
title = "A comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on multimorbidity require cautious interpretation when drawn from a single database",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: We investigated the degree of comparability of the prevalence of chronic diseases and disease combinations in the elderly in two databases comparable with regard to diseases included, sex and age of the patients (65-85 years), and cutoff score for case definition.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: One study is based on chart-supported interviews with the primary care physicians within a cohort study of 3,189 multimorbid elderly patients. The second study analyzed claims data from ambulatory care delivered to the multimorbid members of one German Health Insurance (n = 70,031). Multimorbidity was defined by the presence of three or more chronic conditions from an identical list of 46 diseases.RESULTS: The difference of the median number of chronic conditions was 1 (mean 6.7 vs. 5.7). The prevalences of individual conditions were approximately one-third lower in the claims data, but the relative rank order corresponded well between the two databases. These relatively small prevalence differences cumulate when combinations of chronic conditions are investigated, for example, the prevalence differences between the two databases increased to nearly 100% for triadic combinations and nearly 170% for quartets.CONCLUSION: The study shows that conclusions regarding the prevalence of combinations of diseases should be drawn with caution when based on a single database.",
keywords = "Humans, Male, Aged, Female, Aged, 80 and over, Sensitivity and Specificity, Risk Assessment, Prevalence, Germany/epidemiology, *Databases, Factual, Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data, Geriatric Assessment/*methods, Chronic Disease/*epidemiology, *Comorbidity, *Data Interpretation, Statistical, Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data, Humans, Male, Aged, Female, Aged, 80 and over, Sensitivity and Specificity, Risk Assessment, Prevalence, Germany/epidemiology, *Databases, Factual, Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data, Geriatric Assessment/*methods, Chronic Disease/*epidemiology, *Comorbidity, *Data Interpretation, Statistical, Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data",
author = "{Bussche van den}, Hendrik and Ingmar Sch{\"a}fer and Birgitt Wiese and Anne Dahlhaus and Angela Fuchs and Jochen Gensichen and Susanne H{\"o}fels and Heike Hansen and Hanna Leicht and Daniela Koller and Melanie Luppa and Anna N{\"u}tzel and Jochen Werle and Martin Scherer and Karl Wegscheider and Gerd Glaeske and Gerhard Sch{\"o}n",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.07.019",
language = "English",
volume = "66",
pages = "209--217",
journal = "J CLIN EPIDEMIOL",
issn = "0895-4356",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparative study demonstrated that prevalence figures on multimorbidity require cautious interpretation when drawn from a single database

AU - Bussche van den, Hendrik

AU - Schäfer, Ingmar

AU - Wiese, Birgitt

AU - Dahlhaus, Anne

AU - Fuchs, Angela

AU - Gensichen, Jochen

AU - Höfels, Susanne

AU - Hansen, Heike

AU - Leicht, Hanna

AU - Koller, Daniela

AU - Luppa, Melanie

AU - Nützel, Anna

AU - Werle, Jochen

AU - Scherer, Martin

AU - Wegscheider, Karl

AU - Glaeske, Gerd

AU - Schön, Gerhard

N1 - Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - OBJECTIVE: We investigated the degree of comparability of the prevalence of chronic diseases and disease combinations in the elderly in two databases comparable with regard to diseases included, sex and age of the patients (65-85 years), and cutoff score for case definition.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: One study is based on chart-supported interviews with the primary care physicians within a cohort study of 3,189 multimorbid elderly patients. The second study analyzed claims data from ambulatory care delivered to the multimorbid members of one German Health Insurance (n = 70,031). Multimorbidity was defined by the presence of three or more chronic conditions from an identical list of 46 diseases.RESULTS: The difference of the median number of chronic conditions was 1 (mean 6.7 vs. 5.7). The prevalences of individual conditions were approximately one-third lower in the claims data, but the relative rank order corresponded well between the two databases. These relatively small prevalence differences cumulate when combinations of chronic conditions are investigated, for example, the prevalence differences between the two databases increased to nearly 100% for triadic combinations and nearly 170% for quartets.CONCLUSION: The study shows that conclusions regarding the prevalence of combinations of diseases should be drawn with caution when based on a single database.

AB - OBJECTIVE: We investigated the degree of comparability of the prevalence of chronic diseases and disease combinations in the elderly in two databases comparable with regard to diseases included, sex and age of the patients (65-85 years), and cutoff score for case definition.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: One study is based on chart-supported interviews with the primary care physicians within a cohort study of 3,189 multimorbid elderly patients. The second study analyzed claims data from ambulatory care delivered to the multimorbid members of one German Health Insurance (n = 70,031). Multimorbidity was defined by the presence of three or more chronic conditions from an identical list of 46 diseases.RESULTS: The difference of the median number of chronic conditions was 1 (mean 6.7 vs. 5.7). The prevalences of individual conditions were approximately one-third lower in the claims data, but the relative rank order corresponded well between the two databases. These relatively small prevalence differences cumulate when combinations of chronic conditions are investigated, for example, the prevalence differences between the two databases increased to nearly 100% for triadic combinations and nearly 170% for quartets.CONCLUSION: The study shows that conclusions regarding the prevalence of combinations of diseases should be drawn with caution when based on a single database.

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Aged

KW - Female

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Sensitivity and Specificity

KW - Risk Assessment

KW - Prevalence

KW - Germany/epidemiology

KW - Databases, Factual

KW - Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data

KW - Geriatric Assessment/methods

KW - Chronic Disease/epidemiology

KW - Comorbidity

KW - Data Interpretation, Statistical

KW - Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Aged

KW - Female

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Sensitivity and Specificity

KW - Risk Assessment

KW - Prevalence

KW - Germany/epidemiology

KW - Databases, Factual

KW - Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data

KW - Geriatric Assessment/methods

KW - Chronic Disease/epidemiology

KW - Comorbidity

KW - Data Interpretation, Statistical

KW - Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.07.019

DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.07.019

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 23257152

VL - 66

SP - 209

EP - 217

JO - J CLIN EPIDEMIOL

JF - J CLIN EPIDEMIOL

SN - 0895-4356

IS - 2

M1 - 2

ER -