Literature DB >> 3599325

The 'epidemiologic necropsy'. Unexpected detections, demographic selections, and changing rates of lung cancer.

M J McFarlane, A R Feinstein, C K Wells, C K Chan.   

Abstract

When rising rates of occurrence are reported for a particular disease, clinicians often cannot determine whether the disease has increased in actual occurrence or in the improved detection provided by better diagnostic technology and expanded access to medical care. The epidemiologic use of necropsy data, which might help answer these questions, has been inhibited by fears of bias in demographic and clinical selection of patients for necropsy. The demographic problem can be managed by suitable adjustment and standardization of the disease rates found at necropsy, and the clinical problem can be reduced or avoided by studying the rates with which the disease is found unexpectedly in necropsies performed for other, unrelated clinical reasons. The results, obtained in population groups "screened" via necropsy, can suggest the magnitude of the "undetected reservoir" that coexists and supplements the rates of reported occurrence for a disease. In a study of necropsies at Yale-New Haven (Conn) Hospital from 1972 to 1981, the necropsy detection rates for lung cancer were slightly higher for women than for men, and were substantially higher for both genders than the customarily reported rates in the general population. The results suggest that the reported rates may continue to rise in both genders until they become essentially equal at a size approximating that of the currently undetected reservoir. The "epidemiologic necropsy" offers a potentially valuable method to help distinguish the true occurrence rates of disease from the changes attributable to improved diagnostic detection with modern technology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3599325     DOI: 10.1001/jama.258.3.331

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  15 in total

Review 1.  Screening for lung cancer using low-dose spiral CT: 10 years later, state of the art.

Authors:  M Zompatori; M Mascalchi; F Ciccarese; N Sverzellati; U Pastorino
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 2.  Differences in clinical communication by gender.

Authors:  V Elderkin-Thompson; H Waitzkin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  Inappropriate comparisons of incidence and prevalence in epidemiologic research.

Authors:  W D Flanders; T R O'Brien
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Supportive evidence for the validity of the epidemiologic necropsy for gallstones.

Authors:  M J McFarlane
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1990 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Declining density of intimal smooth muscle cells as a precondition for atheronecrosis in the coronary artery.

Authors:  R E Tracy
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 4.064

6.  Letters on epidemiologic research methods.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Mathematical models and scientific reality in occurrence rates for disease.

Authors:  A R Feinstein; C K Chan; J M Esdaile; R I Horwitz; M J McFarlane; C K Wells
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Vasculopathy and antiphospholipid antibodies in systemic lupus.

Authors:  J C Piette; C Frances; T Papo; M Karmochkine
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: a prescription for change.

Authors:  Laura J Esserman; Ian M Thompson; Brian Reid; Peter Nelson; David F Ransohoff; H Gilbert Welch; Shelley Hwang; Donald A Berry; Kenneth W Kinzler; William C Black; Mina Bissell; Howard Parnes; Sudhir Srivastava
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 41.316

10.  What is a reasonable cost to refute a preposterous hypothesis?

Authors:  A W Castleberry; F W Grannis
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-01-05       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.