Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health logoLink to Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
. 1996 Feb;50(1):99–103. doi: 10.1136/jech.50.1.99

Estimating the point accuracy of population registers using capture-recapture methods in Scotland.

M J Garton 1, M I Abdalla 1, D M Reid 1, I T Russell 1
PMCID: PMC1060213  PMID: 8762363

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To estimate the point accuracy of adult registration on the community health index (CHI) by comparing it with the electoral register (ER) and the community charge register (CCR). DESIGN: Survey of overlapping samples from three registers to ascertain whether respondents were living at the addresses given on the registers, analysed by capture-recapture methods. SETTING: Aberdeen North and South parliamentary constituencies. PARTICIPANTS: Random samples of adult registrants aged at least 18 years from the CHI (n = 1000), ER (n = 998), and CCR (n = 956). MAIN RESULTS: Estimated sensitivities (the proportions of the target population registered at the address where they live) were: CHI--84.6% (95% confidence limits 82.4%, 86.7%); ER--90.0% (87.5%, 92.5%), and CCR--87.7% (85.3%, 90.3%). Positive predictive values (the proportions of registrants who were living at their stated addresses) were: CHI--84.6% (82.2%, 87.0%); ER--94.0% (90.9%, 97.1%), and CCR--93.7% (91.7%, 95.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The CHI assessed in this study was significantly less sensitive and predictive than the corresponding ER and CCR. Capture-recapture methods are effective in assessing the accuracy of population registers.

Full text

PDF
99

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bickler G., Sutton S. Inaccuracy of FHSA registers: help from electoral registers. BMJ. 1993 May 1;306(6886):1167–1167. doi: 10.1136/bmj.306.6886.1167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bowling A., Jacobson B. Screening: the inadequacy of population registers. BMJ. 1989 Mar 4;298(6673):545–546. doi: 10.1136/bmj.298.6673.545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chamberlain J. Failures of the cervical cytology screening programme. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984 Oct 6;289(6449):853–854. doi: 10.1136/bmj.289.6449.853. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Eardley A., Elkind A. K., Spencer B., Hobbs P., Pendleton L. L., Haran D. Attendance for cervical screening--whose problem? Soc Sci Med. 1985;20(9):955–962. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(85)90352-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Elkind A. K., Haran D., Eardley A., Spencer B. Computer-managed cervical cytology screening: a pilot study of non-attenders. Public Health. 1987 Jul;101(4):253–266. doi: 10.1016/s0033-3506(87)80076-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fisher N., Turner S. W., Pugh R., Taylor C. Estimating numbers of homeless and homeless mentally ill people in north east Westminster by using capture-recapture analysis. BMJ. 1994 Jan 1;308(6920):27–30. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6920.27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fraser R. C., Clayton D. G. The accuracy of age-sex registers, practice medical records and family practitioner committee registers. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1981 Jul;31(228):410–419. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fraser R. C. The reliability and validity of the age-sex register as a population denominator in general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1978 May;28(190):283–286. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Heward J., Clayton D. G. The point accuracy of paediatric population registers. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1980 Jul;30(216):412–416. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Laporte R. E. Assessing the human condition: capture-recapture techniques. BMJ. 1994 Jan 1;308(6920):5–6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6920.5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. McCarty D. J., Tull E. S., Moy C. S., Kwoh C. K., LaPorte R. E. Ascertainment corrected rates: applications of capture-recapture methods. Int J Epidemiol. 1993 Jun;22(3):559–565. doi: 10.1093/ije/22.3.559. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. McKeganey N., Barnard M., Leyland A., Coote I., Follet E. Female streetworking prostitution and HIV infection in Glasgow. BMJ. 1992 Oct 3;305(6857):801–804. doi: 10.1136/bmj.305.6857.801. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Nathoo V. Investigation of non-responders at a cervical cancer screening clinic in Manchester. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1988 Apr 9;296(6628):1041–1042. doi: 10.1136/bmj.296.6628.1041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Roworth M. A., Jones I. G. The Community Health Index--how accurate is it? Community Med. 1988 Nov;10(4):327–330. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a042426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Sansom C. D., MacInerney J., Oliver V., Wakefield J., Yule R. Recall of women in a cervical cytology screening programme. An estimate of the true rate of response. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1975 Jun;29(2):131–134. doi: 10.1136/jech.29.2.131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Scaife B. Survey of cervical cytology in general practice. Br Med J. 1972 Jul 22;3(5820):200–202. doi: 10.1136/bmj.3.5820.200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Sheldon M. G., Rector A. L., Barnes P. A. The accuracy of age-sex registers in general practice. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1984 May;34(262):269–271. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Silman A. J. Age-sex registers as a screening tool for general practice: size of the wrong address problem. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984 Aug 18;289(6442):415–416. doi: 10.1136/bmj.289.6442.415. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES