Impact of the use of small-area models on estimation of attributable mortality at a regional level

The objective of this study is to assess the impact of applying prevalences derived from a small-area model at a regional level on smoking-attributable mortality (SAM). A prevalence-dependent method was used to estimate SAM. Prevalences of tobacco use were derived from a small-area model. SAM and po...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of public health 2024-06, Vol.34 (6), p.1218-1224
Hauptverfasser: Rey-Brandariz, Julia, Santiago-Pérez, María I, Candal-Pedreira, Cristina, Varela-Lema, Leonor, Ruano-Ravina, Alberto, López-Vizcaíno, Esther, Guerra-Tort, Carla, Ahluwalia, Jasjit S, Montes, Agustín, Pérez-Ríos, Mónica
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The objective of this study is to assess the impact of applying prevalences derived from a small-area model at a regional level on smoking-attributable mortality (SAM). A prevalence-dependent method was used to estimate SAM. Prevalences of tobacco use were derived from a small-area model. SAM and population attributable fraction (PAF) estimates were compared against those calculated by pooling data from three national health surveys conducted in Spain (2011-2014-2017). We calculated the relative changes between the two estimates and assessed the width of the 95% CI of the PAF. Applying surveys-based prevalences, tobacco use was estimated to cause 53 825 (95% CI: 53 182-54 342) deaths in Spain in 2017, a figure 3.8% lower obtained with the small-area model prevalences. The lowest relative change was observed in the Castile-La Mancha region (1.1%) and the highest in Navarre (14.1%). The median relative change between regions was higher for women (26.1%), population aged ≥65 years (6.6%), and cardiometabolic diseases (9.0%). The differences between PAF by cause of death were never greater than 2%. Overall, the differences between estimates of SAM, PAF, and confidence interval width are small when using prevalences from both sources. Having these data available by region will allow decision-makers to implement smoking control measures based on more accurate data.
ISSN:1101-1262
1464-360X
1464-360X
DOI:10.1093/eurpub/ckae104