A network approach to studying cause-of-death interrelations

Egidi, Viviana; Salvatore, Michele Antonio; Rivellini, Giulia; D’Angelo, Silvia

doi:10.4054/demres.2018.38.16

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Methods for grouping multiple causes of death were largely used to understand more complex relationships between multiple causes of death or to highlight patterns of disease that commonly co-contribute to death with more than two causes of interest. In some articles, the groupings were user-specified combinations of causes 11,[61][62][63] while others used data-driven methods such as cluster analysis, 64,65 social network analysis 66 and more exploratory methods of data mining. 67,68 Social network analysis identified links (and their strengths) between causes of death, cluster analysis methods grouped decedents on the basis of similarity between causes, that is, based on the causes of death that commonly co-contribute to death, and data mining techniques were applied to identify complex patterns in mortality data 68 and assess temporal evolution of the leading clusters of conditions that cause death.…”

Section: Assessing Mortality Patterns For Grouped Causes Of Deathsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of multiple causes of death: a review of methods and practices

Bishop

Balogun

Eynstone-Hinkins

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Research and reporting of mortality indicators typically focus on a single underlying cause of death selected from multiple causes recorded on a death certificate. The need to incorporate the multiple causes in mortality statistics - reflecting increasing multimorbidity and complex causation patterns - is recognised internationally. This review aims to identify and appraise relevant multiple cause analytical methods and practices. Methods We searched Medline, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science from inception to December 2020 without language restrictions, supplemented by consultation with international experts. Eligible articles included those analysing multiple causes of death from death certificates. The process identified 4,080 articles; after screening, 434 full texts were reviewed. Results Most reviewed articles (77%, n=332) were published since 2001. The majority examined mortality by 'any-mention' of a cause of death (87%, n=377) and assessed pairwise combinations of causes (56%, n=245). Recently emerging (since 2001) were applications of methods to group deaths based on common cause patterns using, for example, cluster analysis (2%, n=9), and the application of multiple cause weights to re-evaluate mortality burden (1%, n=5). Multiple cause methods applied to specific research objectives are described for recently emerging approaches. Conclusion This review confirms rapidly increasing international interest in the analysis of multiple causes of death and provides the most comprehensive overview of methods and practices to date. Available multiple cause methods are diverse but suit a range of research objectives, that with greater data availability and technology could be further developed and applied across a range of settings.

show abstract

Section: Assessing Mortality Patterns For Grouped Causes Of Deathsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of multiple causes of death: a review of methods and practices

Bishop

Balogun

Eynstone-Hinkins

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is especially the case for SAD, which are generally present in patients with multiple comorbidities. [18,19] Since the mid-20th century, mortality studies that analyze multiple causes of death in chronic disease patients have been considered important for gaining new insights into disease prevention. [19,20] In the last decade, there have been studies that use this methodology in SAD mortality.…”

Section: Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Using Multiple Cause-of-Death Analysis to Estimate Systemic Autoimmune Disease Mortality Burden in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Hernández-Negrín¹,

Roque-Dapresa²,

Martínez-Morales

et al. 2021

MEDICC Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autoimmune diseases are not always recognized as urgent health issues, despite a worldwide prevalence of 4%-5%. Most estimates come from high-income countries, as low-and middle-income countries face more issues of under-reporting. Despite this and the lack of recognition under current reporting practices, the role these diseases play in mortality must be acknowledged. In particular, considering multiple causes of death as opposed to a single cause of death results in a 1.5-4.2-fold increase in deaths classifi ed as relating to autoimmune diseases, evidence of their share in overall mortality burden, a factor important for patient care and healthcare policy decision making.However, formulating such policies and programs for timely, appropriate diagnoses and care is stymied in low-and middle-income countries by the shortage of methodologically sound studies on mor-tality from systemic autoimmune diseases. This limitation exacerbates inequalities and health gaps among patients in different countries and localities.Multiple cause-of-death methodology has been validated for research on other diseases and demonstrates the mortality burden of these illnesses in countries where traditional methodological approaches, primarily based on prospective cohort studies, are not feasible. Studying mortality from systemic autoimmune diseases by analyzing multiple causes of death with data from national mortality registries is a lowcost alternative to traditional mortality analysis. The objective of this paper is to demonstrate and defend the usefulness of this approach to estimate mortality burden.

show abstract

“…[2] They are extracted from medical death certi cates where certi ers (physicians or coroners) are asked to describe the causal sequence leading to death. These data have been studied to assess associations between diseases in the general population, [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] although the di culties of such study design have long been emphasized. [10][11][12] For example, the risk of suicide in patients with Parkinson's disease was estimated in an often-cited study based on death certi cate data.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Collider and Reporting Biases Involved in the Analyses of Cause of Death Associations in Death Certificates: an Illustration with Cancer and Suicide

Laanani

Viallon

Coste

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Data from death certificates have been studied to explore causal associations between diseases. However, these analyses are subject to collider and reporting biases (selection and information biases, respectively). Methods: We aimed to assess to what extent associations of causes of death estimated from individual mortality data can be extrapolated to the general population. We used a multistate model to generate populations of individuals and simulate their health states up to death from national health statistics and artificially replicate collider bias. Associations between health states can then be estimated from such simulated deaths by logistic regression and the magnitude of collider bias assessed. Reporting bias can be approximated by comparing the estimates obtained from the observed death certificates (subject to collider and reporting biases) with those obtained from the simulated deaths (subject to collider bias only). Results: As an illustrative example, we estimated the association between cancer and suicide in French death certificates, and found that cancer was negatively associated with suicide. Collider bias, due to conditioning inclusion in the study population on death, increasingly downwarded the associations with cancer site lethality. Reporting bias was much stronger than collider bias and depended on the cancer site, but not prognosis. Conclusions: These results argue for an assessment of the magnitude of both collider and reporting biases before performing analyses of cause of death associations exclusively from death certificates. If these biases cannot be corrected, results from these analyses should not be extrapolated to the general population.

show abstract

A network approach to studying cause-of-death interrelations

Cited by 8 publications

References 37 publications

Analysis of multiple causes of death: a review of methods and practices

Analysis of multiple causes of death: a review of methods and practices

Using Multiple Cause-of-Death Analysis to Estimate Systemic Autoimmune Disease Mortality Burden in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Collider and Reporting Biases Involved in the Analyses of Cause of Death Associations in Death Certificates: an Illustration with Cancer and Suicide

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About