title: Algorithms for enhancing public health utility of national causes-of-death data.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Coverage and quality of cause-of-death (CoD) data varies across countries and time. Valid, reliable, and comparable assessments of trends in causes of death from even the best systems are limited by three problems: a) changes in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) over time; b) the use of tabulation lists where substantial detail on causes of death is lost; and c) many deaths assigned to causes that cannot or should not be considered underlying causes of death, often called garbage codes (GCs). The Global Burden of Disease Study and the World Health Organization have developed various methods to enhance comparability of CoD data. In this study, we attempt to build on these approaches to enhance the utility of national cause-of-death data for public health analysis.
  
  
  METHODS
  Based on careful consideration of 4,434 country-years of CoD data from 145 countries from 1901 to 2008, encompassing 743 million deaths in ICD versions 1 to 10 as well as country-specific cause lists, we have developed a public health-oriented cause-of-death list. These 56 causes are organized hierarchically and encompass all deaths. Each cause has been mapped from ICD-6 to ICD-10 and, where possible, they have also been mapped to the International List of Causes of Death 1-5. We developed a typology of different classes of GCs. In each ICD revision, GCs have been identified. Target causes to which these GCs should be redistributed have been identified based on certification practice and/or pathophysiology. Proportionate redistribution, statistical models, and expert algorithms have been developed to redistribute GCs to target codes for each age-sex group.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The fraction of all deaths assigned to GCs varies tremendously across countries and revisions of the ICD. In general, across all country-years of data available, GCs have declined from more than 43% in ICD-7 to 24% in ICD-10. In some regions, such as Australasia, GCs in 2005 are as low as 11%, while in some developing countries, such as Thailand, they are greater than 50%. Across different age groups, the composition of GCs varies tremendously - three classes of GCs steadily increase with age, but ambiguous codes within a particular disease chapter are also common for injuries at younger ages. The impact of redistribution is to change the number of deaths assigned to particular causes for a given age-sex group. These changes alter ranks across countries for any given year by a number of different causes, change time trends, and alter the rank order of causes within a country.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  By mapping CoD through different ICD versions and redistributing GCs, we believe the public health utility of CoD data can be substantially enhanced, leading to an increased demand for higher quality CoD data from health sector decision-makers.
authors.affiliation: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA. nagham@u.washington.edu.
authors.forename: Mohsen
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Naghavi
authors.forename: Susanna
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Makela
authors.forename: Kyle
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Foreman
authors.forename: Janaki
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: O'Brien
authors.forename: Farshad
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Pourmalek
authors.forename: Rafael
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Lozano
references.citation: Lancet. 2007 Mar 10;369(9564):862-873
references.pmid: 17350457
references.citation: Lancet. 1997 May 3;349(9061):1269-76
references.pmid: 9142060
references.citation: Chronic Dis Can. 2002;23(1):22-30
references.pmid: 11876833
references.citation: Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2008 May;23(5):349-56
references.pmid: 18510795
references.citation: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009 Jan;57(1):133-9
references.pmid: 19016930
references.citation: J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2004 Sep;33(5):421-9
references.pmid: 15480282
references.citation: J Clin Pathol. 1989 Jan;42(1):13-7
references.pmid: 2921339
references.citation: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007 Aug;133(2):179-85
references.pmid: 17010498
references.citation: Bull World Health Organ. 2005 Mar;83(3):171-7
references.pmid: 15798840
references.citation: Hum Pathol. 1993 Feb;24(2):194-8
references.pmid: 8432514
references.citation: J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43(12):1285-95
references.pmid: 2254765
references.citation: J Clin Epidemiol. 1992 Sep;45(9):929-40
references.pmid: 1432022
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Oct;106(4):684-92
references.pmid: 16199622
references.citation: Eur J Epidemiol. 2009;24(11):669-75
references.pmid: 19728117
references.citation: Eur J Popul. 1996 Dec;12(4):327-61
references.pmid: 12320825
references.citation: Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2001 May 18;49(2):1-32
references.pmid: 11381674
references.citation: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002 Apr;81(4):323-7
references.pmid: 11952462
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Jul;90(1):78-82
references.pmid: 9207818
references.citation: Bull World Health Organ. 2004 Dec;82(12):904-13
references.pmid: 15654404
references.citation: Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2002 Apr;18(4):182-90
references.pmid: 12164011
references.citation: J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Jan;54(1):40-50
references.pmid: 11165467
references.citation: Mayo Clin Proc. 2000 Jun;75(6):562-7
references.pmid: 10852416
references.citation: Bull World Health Organ. 2006 Mar;84(3):254
references.pmid: 16583088
references.citation: Lancet. 2007 Mar 24;369(9566):1039-46
references.pmid: 17382830