Cargando…

How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches

BACKGROUND: The concept of “premature mortality” is at the heart of many national and global health measurement and benchmarking efforts. However, despite the intuitive appeal of its underlying concept, it is far from obvious how to best operationalise it. The previous work offers at least two basic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mazzuco, S. Stefano, Suhrcke, M. Marc, Zanotto, L. Lucia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34702295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y
_version_ 1784590322068619264
author Mazzuco, S. Stefano
Suhrcke, M. Marc
Zanotto, L. Lucia
author_facet Mazzuco, S. Stefano
Suhrcke, M. Marc
Zanotto, L. Lucia
author_sort Mazzuco, S. Stefano
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The concept of “premature mortality” is at the heart of many national and global health measurement and benchmarking efforts. However, despite the intuitive appeal of its underlying concept, it is far from obvious how to best operationalise it. The previous work offers at least two basic approaches: an absolute and a relative one. The former—and far more widely used— approach sets a unique age threshold (e.g. 65 years), below which deaths are defined as premature. The relative approach derives the share of premature deaths from the country-specific age distribution of deaths in the country of interest. The biggest disadvantage of the absolute approach is that of using a unique, arbitrary threshold for different mortality patterns, while the main disadvantage of the relative approach is that its estimate of premature mortality strongly depends on how the senescent deaths distribution is defined in each country. METHOD: We propose to overcome some of the downsides of the existing approaches, by combining features of both, using a hierarchical model, in which senescent deaths distribution is held constant for each country as a pivotal quantity and the premature mortality distribution is allowed to vary across countries. In this way, premature mortality estimates become more comparable across countries with similar characteristics. RESULTS: The proposed hierarchical models provide results, which appear to align with related evidence from  specific countries. In particular, we find a relatively high premature mortality for the United States and Denmark. CONCLUSIONS: While our hybrid approach overcomes some of the problems of previous measures, some issues require further research, in particular the choice of the group of countries that a given country is assigned to and the choice of the benchmarks within the groups. Hence, our proposed method, combined with further study addressing these issues, could provide a valid alternative way to measure and compare premature mortality across countries.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8547117
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85471172021-10-26 How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches Mazzuco, S. Stefano Suhrcke, M. Marc Zanotto, L. Lucia Popul Health Metr Research BACKGROUND: The concept of “premature mortality” is at the heart of many national and global health measurement and benchmarking efforts. However, despite the intuitive appeal of its underlying concept, it is far from obvious how to best operationalise it. The previous work offers at least two basic approaches: an absolute and a relative one. The former—and far more widely used— approach sets a unique age threshold (e.g. 65 years), below which deaths are defined as premature. The relative approach derives the share of premature deaths from the country-specific age distribution of deaths in the country of interest. The biggest disadvantage of the absolute approach is that of using a unique, arbitrary threshold for different mortality patterns, while the main disadvantage of the relative approach is that its estimate of premature mortality strongly depends on how the senescent deaths distribution is defined in each country. METHOD: We propose to overcome some of the downsides of the existing approaches, by combining features of both, using a hierarchical model, in which senescent deaths distribution is held constant for each country as a pivotal quantity and the premature mortality distribution is allowed to vary across countries. In this way, premature mortality estimates become more comparable across countries with similar characteristics. RESULTS: The proposed hierarchical models provide results, which appear to align with related evidence from  specific countries. In particular, we find a relatively high premature mortality for the United States and Denmark. CONCLUSIONS: While our hybrid approach overcomes some of the problems of previous measures, some issues require further research, in particular the choice of the group of countries that a given country is assigned to and the choice of the benchmarks within the groups. Hence, our proposed method, combined with further study addressing these issues, could provide a valid alternative way to measure and compare premature mortality across countries. BioMed Central 2021-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8547117/ /pubmed/34702295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Mazzuco, S. Stefano
Suhrcke, M. Marc
Zanotto, L. Lucia
How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches
title How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches
title_full How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches
title_fullStr How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches
title_full_unstemmed How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches
title_short How to measure premature mortality? A proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches
title_sort how to measure premature mortality? a proposal combining “relative” and “absolute” approaches
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34702295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-021-00267-y
work_keys_str_mv AT mazzucosstefano howtomeasureprematuremortalityaproposalcombiningrelativeandabsoluteapproaches
AT suhrckemmarc howtomeasureprematuremortalityaproposalcombiningrelativeandabsoluteapproaches
AT zanottollucia howtomeasureprematuremortalityaproposalcombiningrelativeandabsoluteapproaches