Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T22:49:46.539Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How well do Investigators Estimate Results in Advance?: A Methodological Study from a Multinational Epidemiological Survey on Hip Fracture Risks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Erik Allander
Erik Allander
Affiliation:
Karolinska Institute
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to compare the factual results with the perception of results by the expert investigators involved in a major epidemiological study on risk factors for hip fracture, the Mediterranean Osteoporosis Study (MEDOS), and to do so before the actual results were known. A selection of 30 questions were used from the original MEDOS questionnaire to obtain estimates of selected key risk factors from the 14 participating experts. Ten investigators participated, six of whom filled out the questionnaire completely; these six questionnaires were used for the analysis. The population was estimated to be younger, to have better functional capacity, and to be more subjected to preventive activities than the actual survey data showed. Several methodological problems are explored.

Keywords

Result EstimatesEpidemiologyRisk FactorsHip FractureHealth Planning
Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , Fall 1998 , pp. 728 - 734
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Allander, E.Results of conference questionnaire to participants on key issues in the prevention of osteoporosis. Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology, 1996, 25 (Suppl. 103), 5562.Google Scholar
2.Allander, E., & Lindahl, B. I. B.The Mediterranean Osteoporosis Study (MEDOS): Theoretical and practical issues of a major international project on hip fracture epidemiology. Bone, 1993, 14 (Suppl. 1), S37–S43.Google Scholar
3.Allander, E., & Nyström, M.Assessment of need for surgery for patients with rheumatoid arthritis including current distribution of resources and their use (in Swedish). Socialmedicinsk Tidskrift, 1984, 10, 454–66.Google Scholar
4.Ankjaer-Jensen, A., & Johnell, O.Prevention of osteoporosis: Cost-effectiveness of different pharmaceutical treatments. Osteoporosis International, 1996, 6, 265–75.Google Scholar
5.Borak, J., & Veilleux, S.Errors of intuitive logic among physicians. Social Science and Medicine 1982, 16, 1939–47.Google Scholar
6.Dequeker, J., Ranstam, J., Valsson, J., and the MEDOS study group. The Mediterranean Osteoporosis (MEDOS) Study Questionnaire. Clinical Rheumatology, 1991, 10, 54–72.Google Scholar
7.Freemantle, N.Dealing with uncertainty: Will science solve the problems of resource allocation in the U.K. NHS? Social Science and Medicine, 1995, 40, 1365–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Gallagher, M., Bradshaw, C., & Nattress, H.Policy priorities in diabetes care: A Delphi study. Quality in Health Care, 1996, 5, 3–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Hakulinen, T., & Hakama, M.Predictions of epidemiology and the evaluation of cancer control measures and the setting of policy priorities. Social Science and Medicine, 1991, 33, 1379–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Kanis, J. A., Johnell, O., Gullberg, B., and the MEDOS study group. Evidence for the efficacy of drugs affecting bone metabolism in preventing hip fracture. British Medical Journal, 1992, 305, 1124–28.Google Scholar
11.Mackillop, W. J., & Quirt, C. F.Measuring the accuracy of prognostic judgments in oncology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1997, 50, 21–29.Google Scholar
13.Melton, L. J. III, Atkinson, E. J., & Madhok, R.Downturn in hip fracture incidence. Public Health Reports, 1996, 111, 146–50.Google Scholar
14.Pearson, S. D., Goldman, L., Orav, E. J., et al. Triage decisions for emergency department patients with chest pain: Do physicians’ risk attitudes make the difference? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 1995, 10, 557–64.Google Scholar
15.Ranstam, J., & Kanis, J. A.Influence of age and body mass on the effects of vitamin D on hip fracture risk. Osteoporosis International, 1995, 5, 450–54.Google Scholar
16.Rizzi, D. A.Causal reasoning and the diagnostic process. Theoretical Medicine, 1994, 15, 315–33.Google Scholar
17.Russell, L. B.Educated guesses. Making policy about medical screening tests. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994.Google Scholar