Abstract

Different indicators of morbidity for chronic disease may not necessarily be available at a disaggregated spatial scale (e.g., for small areas with populations under 10 thousand). Instead certain indicators may only be available at a more highly aggregated spatial scale; for example, deaths may be recorded for small areas, but disease prevalence only at a considerably higher spatial scale. Nevertheless prevalence estimates at small area level are important for assessing health need. An instance is provided by England where deaths and hospital admissions for coronary heart disease are available for small areas known as wards, but prevalence is only available for relatively large health authority areas. To estimate CHD prevalence at small area level in such a situation, a shared random effect method is proposed that pools information regarding spatial morbidity contrasts over different indicators (deaths, hospitalizations, prevalence). The shared random effect approach also incorporates differences between small areas in known risk factors (e.g., income, ethnic structure). A Poisson-multinomial equivalence may be used to ensure small area prevalence estimates sum to the known higher area total. An illustration is provided by data for London using hospital admissions and CHD deaths at ward level, together with CHD prevalence totals for considerably larger local health authority areas. The shared random effect involved a spatially correlated common factor, that accounts for clustering in latent risk factors, and also provides a summary measure of small area CHD morbidity.

Highlights

  • Profiling geographic variations in health care need is important for equitable and effective targeting of resources that reflects inequalities in morbidity [1]

  • Prevalence of major conditions treated in primary care in England has been administratively recorded under a system known as the Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF), but not at a disaggregated spatial scale

  • As argued above, estimating Coronary heart disease (CHD) prevalence at small area level is important, and this paper develops a shared random effect method to pool information regarding spatial morbidity contrasts over multiple indicators

Read more

Summary

Background

Profiling geographic variations in health care need is important for equitable and effective targeting of resources that reflects inequalities in morbidity [1]. As argued above, estimating CHD prevalence at small area level is important, and this paper develops a shared random effect (or common factor) method to pool information regarding spatial morbidity contrasts over multiple indicators (deaths, hospitalizations, prevalence). This provides a summary index for representing small area CHD morbidity which is applied to estimate small area CHD prevalence totals and relative prevalence risks (comparing actual to expected prevalence). If the xjl are standardised, the absolute size of the β coefficients measures the relative importance of different population risk factors or socio-economic variables in defining the morbidity index.

Methods
Discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call