Suppr超能文献

死亡证明上死因不明且原因多样——一项关于死亡率统计中错误分类的研究。

Ill-defined and multiple causes on death certificates--a study of misclassification in mortality statistics.

作者信息

D'Amico M, Agozzino E, Biagino A, Simonetti A, Marinelli P

机构信息

Preventive department Local Health Authority (ASL) Naples, Italy.

出版信息

Eur J Epidemiol. 1999 Feb;15(2):141-8. doi: 10.1023/a:1007570405888.

Abstract

Biases can distort, limit or inhibit the value of mortality data as an epidemiological re source. From 9500 deaths occurring in Naples (Italy during 1994, a random sample of 372 death certificates reporting ill-defined causes and multiple causes of death was extracted. The code for the underlying cause on the death certificate (assigned code) was compared with the cause reattributed with the aid of interview of the certifying physician or clinical records (modified code). The aim was to investigate the extent of misclassification of 'underlying cause' in deaths attributed to ill-defined and/or multiple causes and the shortcomings in the ICD-IX. Ill-defined underlying causes of death (7.0% of death certificates) were cardiovascular diseases, tumours with no specified site or nature, symptoms, signs, ill-defined conditions and senility. There was disagreement between the initially assigned code and the modified code in 53.8% of ill-defined underlying causes; discordance was high for the certificates filled in by the family physician. Multiple causes of death were observed in 23.6% of certificates; of these 59.2% concerned subjects aged 75 years and over at death. Diabetes was always listed in association with other pathologies but neoplasms and traumas were generally listed alone. Disagreement between codes occurred in 48 (54.5%) certificates indicating multiple causes. In 10 of them, death was established as due to a concurrence of causes. As regards ill-defined causes of death, the authors concluded that specific training on certifying procedures would be insufficient on their own; the physician should be made aware that certification is a fundamental requirement for building up epidemiological data. Evidence-based educational interventions are needed. As regards multiple causes of death, multicausal analysis may be indicated for deaths due to a concurrence of causes.

摘要

偏倚可能会扭曲、限制或抑制死亡率数据作为一种流行病学资源的价值。从1994年意大利那不勒斯发生的9500例死亡病例中,随机抽取了372份报告死因不明和多种死因的死亡证明。将死亡证明上的根本死因编码(指定编码)与通过对开具证明的医生进行访谈或临床记录重新确定的死因编码(修正编码)进行比较。目的是调查在归因于死因不明和/或多种死因的死亡中“根本死因”的错误分类程度以及国际疾病分类第九版(ICD - IX)的不足之处。死因不明的根本死因(占死亡证明的7.0%)为心血管疾病、未指明部位或性质的肿瘤、症状、体征、情况不明的病症和衰老。在53.8%的死因不明的根本死因中,最初指定的编码与修正编码存在分歧;家庭医生填写的证明中不一致程度较高。在23.6%的证明中观察到多种死因;其中59.2%涉及死亡时年龄在75岁及以上的受试者。糖尿病总是与其他病理情况一起列出,但肿瘤和创伤通常单独列出。在表明多种死因的48份(54.5%)证明中,编码之间存在分歧。其中10份证明中,死亡被确定为由多种原因共同导致。关于死因不明的情况,作者得出结论,仅对开具证明程序进行特定培训是不够的;应让医生意识到开具证明是建立流行病学数据的一项基本要求。需要基于证据的教育干预措施。关于多种死因,对于由多种原因共同导致的死亡,可能需要进行多因素分析。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验