MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1968128443 · doi:10.1093/aje/kwj130

RE: “FAMILIAL RISK OF MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS: A NATIONWIDE COHORT STUDY”

2006· letter· en· W1968128443 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Kari Hemminki, Xinjun Li, Sven-Erik Johansson, Kristina Sundquist, Jan Sundquist

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmerican Journal of Epidemiology · 2006
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueFamily Support in Illness
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesIndigenous and Northern Affairs Canada
Mots-clésMedicineMultiple sclerosisCohortCohort studyEpidemiologyPediatricsInternal medicineImmunology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In a recent register-based Danish cohort study on multiple sclerosis, Nielsen et al. (1) reported a 7.1-fold increased risk of multiple sclerosis in first-degree relatives of multiple sclerosis patients and an 8.6-fold risk in nontwin siblings. Brothers had a high relative risk of 12.6, as compared with sisters' risk of 6.3. The study was based on the Danish Multiple Sclerosis Register for diagnostic data and on the Danish Civil Registration System for family data, available for persons born in the early 1950s. No age-specific data were given, but, at least for siblings, the age span was probably about 0–45 years, because follow-up was terminated at the end of 1997. Based on uniform diagnostic data and registers with high coverage, the results of this study would be expected to be highly reliable. They provide further evidence for the heritable etiology of this disease, for which a family history is thought to be present in up to 20 percent of cases (2–4). The possibility of family linkage studies also exists in Sweden through the Multigeneration Register, maintained by Statistics Sweden. This resource has been extensively used in the study of familial cancer, because a nationwide cancer register is available (5). For diseases lacking register data, hospital discharge data can be used—as we have shown, for example, for migraine and other headache syndromes (6). We have also used these resources for the study of multiple sclerosis. We constructed a neurologic disease database through linkage of Swedish Hospital Discharge Register data from 1987 onwards to the Multigeneration Register, which contains data on all persons born in Sweden in 1932 or thereafter and their parents. Sibships were constructed for the generation born after 1931. Dates of hospitalization for multiple sclerosis were obtained for all patients who stayed at least one night in the hospital, usually in wards with specialist consultation or neurology departments; the Register does not include data on hospital outpatients or patients seen at health-care centers. Diagnoses were reported according to the Ninth (1987–1996) and Tenth (1997–2001) Revisions of the International Classification of Diseases. Person-years were calculated from the start of follow-up on January 1, 1987, to hospitalization for multiple sclerosis, death, emigration, or the study's closing date (December 31, 2001). Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated as the ratio of the observed number of cases to the expected number of cases. The expected number of cases was calculated for age- (5-year groups), sex-, period- (5-year groups), region-, and socioeconomic status-specific standard incidence rates for persons lacking an affected sibling. Sibling risks were calculated for men and women whose siblings had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, using the cohort methods described by Hemminki et al. (7). Confidence intervals were calculated under the assumption of a Poisson distribution and were adjusted for dependence between the sibling pairs. Between 1987 and 2001, 1,405 male patients and 3,002 female patients were hospitalized for multiple sclerosis in Sweden prior to age 70 years. The hospitalization rate was 2.9/100,000 for men and 6.5/100,000 for women. Seventy-seven nontwin siblings were affected (table 1), with an overall familial risk of hospitalization of 8.2. Familial risk was homogenous over age groups, ranging only from 7.3 to 8.9. Familial risk was twice as high for men (SIR = 12.2) as for women (SIR = 6.6). The numbers of cases were small, but there was a tendency toward a relatively high risk for women at young ages, whereas for men the age group 40–49 years showed the highest risk. Estimated familial risk of hospitalization for multiple sclerosis among siblings of multiple sclerosis patients in Sweden, 1987–2001 Obs, observed number of cases; SIR, standardized incidence ratio; CI, confidence interval. 95% confidence interval excludes 1.00. Estimated familial risk of hospitalization for multiple sclerosis among siblings of multiple sclerosis patients in Sweden, 1987–2001 Obs, observed number of cases; SIR, standardized incidence ratio; CI, confidence interval. 95% confidence interval excludes 1.00. The Swedish Hospital Discharge Register has operated only since 1987, and the present study covered a time period of no longer than 15 years. Thus, our age-specific data may not be very accurate, because some persons in the early part of the study were likely to enter the hospital even before the study began. The overall diagnostic accuracy was probably good, because hospitalization normally involved diagnosis by several physicians, including a neurologist. The results were remarkably similar to the Danish ones (1), the SIRs differing by only a few decimal points: The risk for siblings in our study was 8.2, as compared with 8.6 in Denmark (1); fraternal risks in the two studies were 12.2 and 12.6, respectively, and sororal risks were 6.6 and 6.3, respectively. Women showed a higher background rate of multiple sclerosis compared with men, but the opposite was true for the familial risk. This phenomenon—a higher familial risk in the gender with a lower background rate—has been called “the Carter effect” (8). The familial risks in both of these register-based cohort studies were lower than those cited in the literature, ranging from 12 to 38 (1). This discrepancy conforms to the overall difference in familial risk estimates between interview-based studies and register-based studies that is repeatedly observed in cancer research (5). Interview data on family histories almost invariably exaggerate familial risks. Unfortunately, much of the global literature on familial disease risks is still based on interviews. The inaccuracies of studies based on interviews may have consequences for clinical genetic counseling (9). Conflict of interest: none declared.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,038
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,036

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,047
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0050,002
Communication savante0,0030,003
Science ouverte0,0030,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0380,035
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,009

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,331
Écart entre enseignants0,273 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revueAmerican Journal of EpidemiologyMême sujetFamily Support in IllnessTravaux en français237 207