Mortality rates for stroke in England from 1979 to 2004: trends, diagnostic precision, and artifacts.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stroke mortality appears to be declining more rapidly in the UK than in many other Western countries. To understand this apparent decline better, we studied trends in mortality in the UK using more detailed data than are routinely available. METHODS: Analysis of datasets that include both the underlying cause and all other mentioned causes of death (together, termed "all mentions"): the Oxford Record Linkage Study from 1979 to 2004 and English national data from 1996 to 2004. RESULTS: Mortality rates based on underlying cause and based on all mentions showed similar downward trends. Mortality based on underlying cause alone misses about one quarter of all stroke-related deaths. Changes during the period in the national rules for selecting the underlying cause of death had a significant but fairly small effect on the trend. Overall, mortality fell by an average annual rate of 2.3% (95% confidence interval 2.1% to 2.5%) for stroke excluding subarachnoid hemorrhage; and by 2.1% (1.7% to 2.6%) per annum for subarachnoid hemorrhage. Coding of stroke as hemorrhagic, occlusive, or unspecified varied substantially across the study period. As a result, rates for hemorrhagic and occlusive stroke, affected by artifact, seemed to fall substantially in the first part of the study period and then leveled off. CONCLUSIONS: Studies of stroke mortality should include all mentions as well as the certified underlying cause, otherwise the burden of stroke will be underestimated. Studies of stroke mortality that include strokes specified as hemorrhagic or occlusive, without also considering stroke overall, are likely to be misleading. Stroke mortality in the Oxford region halved between 1979 and 2004.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".