IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/19998981238-1240_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Birth defects surveillance: Assessing the 'gold standard'

Author

Listed:
  • Honein, M.A.
  • Paulozzi, L.J.

Abstract

Objectives. This study assessed the sensitivity of the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects Program (MACDP) by capitalizing on the delayed receipt of a data source. Methods. In 1997, we reviewed the medical records of potential cases from the 1995 birth certificates that had not previously been identified by the MACDP. Capture-recapture methods produced an estimate of total cases. Results. We identified 1149 infants with defects, including 20 exclusively from birth certificates. The estimated sensitivity of the MACDP when data from birth certificates were included was 86.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 80.6%, 91.9%) at 1 year after birth, increasing to 94.8% (95% CI = 90.3%, 97.8%) at 2 years after birth. Conclusions. The MACDP under estimates defects by 13% at 1 year after birth and by 5% at 2 years after birth.

Suggested Citation

  • Honein, M.A. & Paulozzi, L.J., 1999. "Birth defects surveillance: Assessing the 'gold standard'," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 89(8), pages 1238-1240.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1999:89:8:1238-1240_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martin Kulldorff & Zixing Fang & Stephen J Walsh, 2003. "A Tree-Based Scan Statistic for Database Disease Surveillance," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 323-331, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1999:89:8:1238-1240_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.