↓ Skip to main content

Capture-recapture methodology to study rare conditions using surveillance data for fragile X syndrome and muscular dystrophy

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Capture-recapture methodology to study rare conditions using surveillance data for fragile X syndrome and muscular dystrophy
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13023-017-0628-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael G. Smith, Julie Royer, Joshua Mann, Suzanne McDermott, Rodolfo Valdez

Abstract

Rare conditions can be catastrophic for families and the implications for public health can be substantial. Our study compared basic surveillance through active medical record review with a linked administrative data file to assess the number of cases of two rare conditions, fragile X syndrome (FXS) and muscular dystrophy (MD) in a population. Two methods of data collection were used to collect information from five counties comprising two standard metropolitan statistical areas of South Carolina. The passive system relied mostly on health claims data using ICD-9 CM diagnostic codes. The active system relied on a nurse abstracting records from a list of all licensed physicians with specialties in neurology, orthopedics, and genetics. There were 141 FXS cases and 348 MD cases that met the case definitions using active surveillance. Additional cases were found for both conditions but they were determined to not be true cases. After linking the actively collected MD and FXS cases to passive datasets, we found that the estimated total numbers of cases were similar to using capture-recapture analysis; the positive predictive values for cases identified in the passive system were 56.6% for MD and 75.7% for FXS. Applying capture-recapture methods to passively collected surveillance data for rare health conditions produced an estimate of the number of true cases that was similar to that obtained through active data collection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 24%
Psychology 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 5 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,306,566
of 23,298,349 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#831
of 2,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,124
of 310,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#23
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,298,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,699 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.