Search

Background: Direct estimates of rare disease prevalence from public health surveillance may only be available in a few catchment areas. Understanding variation among observed prevalence can inform estimates of prevalence in other locations. The Muscular Dystrophy Surveillance, Tracking, and Research Network (MD STARnet) conducts population-based surveillance of major muscular dystrophies in selected areas of the United States. We identified sources of variation in prevalence estimates of Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy (DBMD) within MD STARnet from published literature and a survey of MD STARnet investigators, then developed a logic model of the relationships between the sources of variation and estimated prevalence. Results: The 17 identified sources of variability fell into four categories: (1) inherent in surveillance systems, (2) particular to rare diseases, (3) particular to medical-records-based surveillance, and (4) resulting from extrapolation. For the sources of uncertainty measured by MD STARnet, we estimated each source's contribution to the total variance in DBMD prevalence. Based on the logic model we fit a multivariable Poisson regression model to 96 age–site–race/ethnicity strata. Age accounted for 74% of the variation between strata, surveillance site for 6%, race/ethnicity for 3%, and 17% remained unexplained. Conclusion: Variation in estimates derived from a non-random sample of states or counties may not be explained by demographic differences alone. Applying these estimates to other populations requires caution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although treatment and control of diabetes can prevent complications and reduce morbidity, few data sources exist at the state level for surveillance of diabetes comorbidities and control. Surveys and electronic health records (EHRs) offer different strengths and weaknesses for surveillance of diabetes and major metabolic comorbidities. Data from self-report surveys suffer from cognitive and recall biases, and generally cannot be used for surveillance of undiagnosed cases. EHR data are becoming more readily available, but pose particular challenges for population estimation since patients are not randomly selected, not everyone has the relevant biomarker measurements, and those included tend to cluster geographically. Methods: We analyzed data from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey, the Health and Retirement Study, and EHR data from the DARTNet Institute to create state-level adjusted estimates of the prevalence and control of diabetes, and the prevalence and control of hypertension and high cholesterol in the diabetes population, age 50 and over for five states: Alabama, California, Florida, Louisiana, and Massachusetts. Results: The estimates from the two surveys generally aligned well. The EHR data were consistent with the surveys for many measures, but yielded consistently lower estimates of undiagnosed diabetes prevalence, and identified somewhat fewer comorbidities in most states. Conclusions: Despite these limitations, EHRs may be a promising source for diabetes surveillance and assessment of control as the datasets are large and created during the routine delivery of health care. Trial Registration: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]