2002
DOI: 10.1016/s1047-2797(01)00285-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Primer and Comparative Review of Major U.S. Mortality Databases

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
345
2
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 451 publications
(354 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
5
345
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Our data for mortality were obtained using the SSDI, instead of the National Death Registry (NDR) [43]. The NDR has been considered the gold standard for data on mortality as supported by an earlier study that showed the SSDI to be accurate in 83% of cases compared with 87% to 98% for the NDR [15]. A recent study by Fillenbaum et al [20] however showed, by combining Social Security Number with date and month of birth, a match between NDR and SSDI was obtained in 94.7% of cases.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our data for mortality were obtained using the SSDI, instead of the National Death Registry (NDR) [43]. The NDR has been considered the gold standard for data on mortality as supported by an earlier study that showed the SSDI to be accurate in 83% of cases compared with 87% to 98% for the NDR [15]. A recent study by Fillenbaum et al [20] however showed, by combining Social Security Number with date and month of birth, a match between NDR and SSDI was obtained in 94.7% of cases.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A combination of Social Security number, first name, middle initial, last name, and date of birth was used to maximize data accuracy [15,20].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these instances, previously established procedures were used to identify "true" matches (Sohn et al, 2006). The NDI is considered the "gold standard" for mortality assessment information as it has the greatest sensitivity in determining vital status among all available population-level sources of mortality data (Cowper et al, 2002). The integrated database was used to identify participants who died within 30 days of their last visit as well as patient demographics such as age and gender.…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All‐cause mortality was assessed via the VA vital status file. The file has 98.3% sensitivity and 97.6% exact agreement with the National Death Index 11, 12. AMI was assessed via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD‐9) codes (410.xx) from VA inpatient treatment files.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%