scholarly journals Using Multiple Cause-of-Death Data to Investigate Associations and Causality between Conditions Listed on the Death Certificate

2007 ◽  
Vol 166 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. D. Redelings ◽  
M. Wise ◽  
F. Sorvillo
PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0259667
Author(s):  
U. S. H. Gamage ◽  
Tim Adair ◽  
Lene Mikkelsen ◽  
Pasyodun Koralage Buddhika Mahesh ◽  
John Hart ◽  
...  

Background Correct certification of cause of death by physicians (i.e. completing the medical certificate of cause of death or MCCOD) and correct coding according to International Classification of Diseases (ICD) rules are essential to produce quality mortality statistics to inform health policy. Despite clear guidelines, errors in medical certification are common. This study objectively measures the impact of different medical certification errors upon the selection of the underlying cause of death. Methods A sample of 1592 error-free MCCODs were selected from the 2017 United States multiple cause of death data. The ten most common types of errors in completing the MCCOD (according to published studies) were individually simulated on the error-free MCCODs. After each simulation, the MCCODs were coded using Iris automated mortality coding software. Chance-corrected concordance (CCC) was used to measure the impact of certification errors on the underlying cause of death. Weights for each error type and Socio-demographic Index (SDI) group (representing different mortality conditions) were calculated from the CCC and categorised (very high, high, medium and low) to describe their effect on cause of death accuracy. Findings The only very high impact error type was reporting an ill-defined condition as the underlying cause of death. High impact errors were found to be reporting competing causes in Part 1 [of the death certificate] and illegibility, with medium impact errors being reporting underlying cause in Part 2 [of the death certificate], incorrect or absent time intervals and reporting contributory causes in Part 1, and low impact errors comprising multiple causes per line and incorrect sequence. There was only small difference in error importance between SDI groups. Conclusions Reporting an ill-defined condition as the underlying cause of death can seriously affect the coding outcome, while other certification errors were mitigated through the correct application of mortality coding rules. Training of physicians in not reporting ill-defined conditions on the MCCOD and mortality coders in correct coding practices and using Iris should be important components of national strategies to improve cause of death data quality.


2009 ◽  
Vol 124 (5) ◽  
pp. 726-732 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Hempstead

Objectives. The rapid growth in diabetes prevalence has increased interest in measuring the burden of this disease. One response has been to add a checkbox for diabetes status to the death certificate, which New Jersey did in 2004. This study assessed the accuracy of the diabetes checkbox and its effect on cause-of-death coding. We analyzed whether a diabetes checkbox is a useful addition to the death certificate. Methods. We examined the trend in cause-of-death coding for diabetes as an underlying and contributing cause of death by analyzing New Jersey mortality data between 1990 and 2005. We assessed the accuracy of the checkbox by examining inconsistencies between cause-of-death coding and checkbox status, and assessed sensitivity by analyzing linked hospital and death data for a cohort of decedents with diabetes. Results. Between 2003 and 2005, there was approximately a 15% increase in the number of deaths listing diabetes as a contributing cause. The number of deaths where diabetes was listed as an underlying cause changed little. Approximately 10% of death certificates had an inconsistency between cause of death and checkbox status. The sensitivity analysis showed that approximately 40% of diabetic decedents had the appropriate checkbox status. Conclusion. The addition of the checkbox was accompanied by a change in the reporting of diabetes as a contributing cause of death. Results from the sensitivity analysis raise questions about the accuracy of the checkbox as a measure of the diabetic status of decedents.


1980 ◽  
Vol 19 (03) ◽  
pp. 162-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Harris ◽  
W. Margaret ◽  
Kathleen Hunter

The recall rate of patients’ family medical histories was studied in 200 cancer and non-cancer patients. Data on age and cause of death for parents and grandparents were collected. Although most patients knew the age and cause of death of parents, less than half knew for grandparents. Cancer patients had significantly greater recall for maternally related relatives. A subsample of patients’ family medical histories was compared to death certificate data. Patients’ reports were found to be highly inaccurate. Since only a small subgroup could provide medical history data for grandparents, the generaliz-ability for history of family illness is questioned.


Author(s):  
Scott Fulmer ◽  
Shruti Jain ◽  
David Kriebel

The opioid epidemic has had disproportionate effects across various sectors of the population, differentially impacting various occupations. Commercial fishing has among the highest rates of occupational fatalities in the United States. This study used death certificate data from two Massachusetts fishing ports to calculate proportionate mortality ratios of fatal opioid overdose as a cause of death in commercial fishing. Statistically significant proportionate mortality ratios revealed that commercial fishermen were greater than four times more likely to die from opioid poisoning than nonfishermen living in the same fishing ports. These important quantitative findings suggest opioid overdoses, and deaths to diseases of despair in general, deserve further study in prevention, particularly among those employed in commercial fishing.


2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrico Grande ◽  
Antonella Zucchetto ◽  
Barbara Suligoi ◽  
Francesco Grippo ◽  
Marilena Pappagallo ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pam Groenewald ◽  
Ria Laubscher ◽  
Victoria Pillay van Wyck ◽  
William Msemburi ◽  
Debbie Bradshaw ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document