Redistribution of garbage codes to underlying causes of death: a systematic analysis on Italy and a comparison with most populous Western European countries based on the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.
Journal
European journal of public health
ISSN: 1464-360X
Titre abrégé: Eur J Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9204966
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 06 2022
01 06 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
22
1
2022
medline:
7
6
2022
entrez:
21
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The proportion of reported causes of death (CoDs) that are not underlying causes can be relevant even in high-income countries and seriously affect health planning. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study identifies these 'garbage codes' (GCs) and redistributes them to underlying causes using evidence-based algorithms. Planners relying on vital registration data will find discrepancies with GBD estimates. We analyse these discrepancies, through the analysis of GCs and their redistribution. We explored the case of Italy, at national and regional level, and compared it to nine other Western European countries with similar population sizes. We analysed differences between official data and GBD 2019 estimates, for the period 1990-2017 for which we had vital registration data for most select countries. In Italy, in 2017, 33 000 deaths were attributed to unspecified type of stroke and 15 000 to unspecified type of diabetes, these making a fourth of the overall garbage. Significant heterogeneity exists on the overall proportion of GCs, type (unspecified or impossible underlying causes), and size of specific GCs among regions in Italy, and among the select countries. We found no pattern between level of garbage and relevance of specific GCs. Even locations performing below average show interesting lower levels for certain GCs if compared to better performing countries. This systematic analysis suggests the heterogeneity in GC levels and causes, paired with a more detailed analysis of local practices, strengths and weaknesses, could be a positive element in a strategy for the reduction of GCs in Italy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The proportion of reported causes of death (CoDs) that are not underlying causes can be relevant even in high-income countries and seriously affect health planning. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study identifies these 'garbage codes' (GCs) and redistributes them to underlying causes using evidence-based algorithms. Planners relying on vital registration data will find discrepancies with GBD estimates. We analyse these discrepancies, through the analysis of GCs and their redistribution.
METHODS
We explored the case of Italy, at national and regional level, and compared it to nine other Western European countries with similar population sizes. We analysed differences between official data and GBD 2019 estimates, for the period 1990-2017 for which we had vital registration data for most select countries.
RESULTS
In Italy, in 2017, 33 000 deaths were attributed to unspecified type of stroke and 15 000 to unspecified type of diabetes, these making a fourth of the overall garbage. Significant heterogeneity exists on the overall proportion of GCs, type (unspecified or impossible underlying causes), and size of specific GCs among regions in Italy, and among the select countries. We found no pattern between level of garbage and relevance of specific GCs. Even locations performing below average show interesting lower levels for certain GCs if compared to better performing countries.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic analysis suggests the heterogeneity in GC levels and causes, paired with a more detailed analysis of local practices, strengths and weaknesses, could be a positive element in a strategy for the reduction of GCs in Italy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35061890
pii: 6513621
doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckab194
pmc: PMC9159332
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
456-462Investigateurs
Lorenzo Monasta
(L)
Gianfranco Alicandro
(G)
Maja Pasovic
(M)
Matthew Cunningham
(M)
Benedetta Armocida
(B)
Luciana Albano
(L)
Ettore Beghi
(E)
Massimiliano Beghi
(M)
Cristina Bosetti
(C)
Nicola Luigi Bragazzi
(NL)
Giulia Carreras
(G)
Giulio Castelpietra
(G)
Alberico L Catapano
(AL)
Maria Sofia Cattaruzza
(MS)
Giulia Collatuzzo
(G)
Sara Conti
(S)
Giovanni Damiani
(G)
Pietro Ferrara
(P)
Carla Fornari
(C)
Silvano Gallus
(S)
Simona Giampaoli
(S)
Davide Golinelli
(D)
Gaetano Isola
(G)
Paolo Lauriola
(P)
Carlo La Vecchia
(C)
Matilde Leonardi
(M)
Francesca Giulia Magnani
(FG)
Giada Minelli
(G)
Marcello Moccia
(M)
Paolo Pedersini
(P)
Norberto Perico
(N)
Alberto Raggi
(A)
Giuseppe Remuzzi
(G)
Francesco Sanmarchi
(F)
Davide Sattin
(D)
Brigid Unim
(B)
Jorge Hugo Villafañe
(JH)
Francesco S Violante
(FS)
Christopher J L Murray
(CJL)
Luca Ronfani
(L)
Mohsen Naghavi
(M)
Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association.
Références
J Korean Med Sci. 2016 Nov;31 Suppl 2:S121-S128
pubmed: 27775249
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021 Jun 2;21(1):175
pubmed: 34078366
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1223-1249
pubmed: 33069327
BMC Med. 2020 Mar 9;18(1):55
pubmed: 32146899
PLoS Med. 2016 Jun 28;13(6):e1002056
pubmed: 27351744
Epidemiol Prev. 2021 May-Jun;45(3):130-131
pubmed: 34212687
Popul Health Metr. 2010 May 10;8:9
pubmed: 20459720
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1204-1222
pubmed: 33069326
Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Nov 1;92(11):807-16
pubmed: 25378742
Popul Health Metr. 2014 Feb 17;12(1):3
pubmed: 24533639
Arch Public Health. 2021 Mar 15;79(1):33
pubmed: 33722272
ACM BCB. 2018 Aug;2018:178-183
pubmed: 32558825
J Clin Pathol. 2002 Apr;55(4):275-9
pubmed: 11919211
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1160-1203
pubmed: 33069325
Epidemiol Prev. 2019 Mar-Jun;43(2-3):161-170
pubmed: 31293135
Am J Public Health. 2020 Feb;110(2):222-229
pubmed: 31855478