Abstract

ABSTRACTOBJECTIVE to discuss the impact four different redistribution strategies have on the quantitative and temporal trends of cancer mortality assessment in Brazil.METHODOLOGY This study used anonymized and georeferenced data provided by the Brazilian Ministry of Health (BMoH). Four different approaches were used to conduct the redistribution of ill-defined deaths and garbage codes. Age-standardized mortality rates used the world population as reference. Prais-Winsten autoregression allowed the calculation of region, sex, and cancer type trends.RESULTS Death rates increased considerably in all regions after redistribution. Overall, Elisabeth B. França’s and the World Health Organization methods had a milder impact on trends and rate magnitudes when compared to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 method. This study also observed that, when the BMoH dealt with the problem of redistributing ill-defined deaths, results were similar to those obtained by the GBD method. The redistribution methods also influenced the assessment of trends; however, differences were less pronounced.CONCLUSIONS Since developing a comparative gold standard is impossible, matching global techniques to local realities may be an alternative for methodological selection. In our study, the compatibility of the findings suggests how valid the GBD method is to the Brazilian context. However, caution is needed. Future studies should assess the impact of these methods as applied to the redistribution of deaths to type-specific neoplasms.

Highlights

  • França’s and the World Health Organization methods had a milder impact on trends and rate magnitudes when compared to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 method

  • This study observed that, when the Brazilian Ministry of Health (BMoH) dealt with the problem of redistributing ill-defined deaths, results were similar to those obtained by the GBD method

  • The compatibility of the findings suggests how valid the GBD method is to the Brazilian context

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Preventive and therapeutic interventions require constant epidemiological surveillance. The under-registration of deaths (low coverage of the information system), a high proportion of deaths classified as due to unspecified causes[4], and the inadequate reporting of immediate or mediate conditions as the underlying cause of death (usually referred to as “garbage codes”)[5] are the main problems affecting the reliability of mortality data. Both the low coverage and a high proportion of garbage codes affect the Mortality Information System in Brazil[6]. A recent global health study on cancer mortality in high- and middle-income countries excluded Brazilian data due to the insufficient coverage of the mortality information system during this period[3]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
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