Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug;33(8):e5870.
doi: 10.1002/pds.5870.

Trends in the Completeness and Validity of Sources of Death Data Against the National Death Index From 2010 to 2018

Todd Sponholtz  1 , Aziza Jamal-Allial  1 , Shiva K Vojjala  1 , Anahit Papazian  1 , Biruk Eshete  1 , Mark Paullin  1 , Seyed Hamidreza Mahmoudpour  2 , Patrice Verpillat  2 , Daniel C Beachler  1
Affiliations

Trends in the Completeness and Validity of Sources of Death Data Against the National Death Index From 2010 to 2018

Todd Sponholtz et al. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: We investigated time trends in validation performance characteristics for six sources of death data available within the Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD) over 8 years.

Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a cohort of advanced cancer patients with linked National Death Index (NDI) data identified in the HIRD between 2010 and 2018. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for six sources of death status data and an algorithm combining data from available sources using NDI data as the reference standard. Measures were calculated for each year of the study including all members in the cohort for at least 1 day in that year.

Results: We identified 27 396 deaths from any source among 40 692 cohort members. Between 2010 and 2018, the sensitivity of the Death Master File (DMF) decreased from 0.77 (95% CI = 0.76, 0.79) to 0.12 (95% CI = 0.11, 0.14). In contrast, the sensitivity of online obituary data increased from 0.43 (95% CI = 0.41, 0.45) in 2012 to 0.71 (95% CI = 0.68, 0.73) in 2018. The sensitivity of the composite algorithm remained above 0.83 throughout the study period. PPV was observed to be high from 2010 to 2016 and decrease thereafter for all sources. Specificity and NPV remained at high levels throughout the study.

Conclusions: We observed that the sensitivity of mortality data sources compared with the NDI could change substantially between 2010 and 2018. Other validation characteristics were less variable. Combining multiple sources of mortality data may be necessary to achieve adequate performance particularly for multiyear studies.

Keywords: mortality; observational data; real world data; validation.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. B. da Graca, G. Filardo, and D. Nicewander, “Consequences for Healthcare Quality and Research of the Exclusion of Records From the Death Master File,” Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes 6, no. 1 (2013): 124–128.
    1. H. C. Chase, “Report on a National Death Index—Pros and Cons,” American Journal of Public Health 62, no. 5 (1972): 719–723.
    1. K. B. Davis, L. Fisher, M. J. Gillespie, and M. Pettinger, “A Test of the National Death Index Using the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS),” Controlled Clinical Trials 6, no. 3 (1985): 179–191.
    1. C. A. Boyle and P. Decoufle, “National Sources of Vital Status Information: Extent of Coverage and Possible Selectivity in Reporting,” American Journal of Epidemiology 131, no. 1 (1990): 160–168.
    1. E. E. Calle and D. D. Terrell, “Utility of the National Death Index for Ascertainment of Mortality Among Cancer Prevention Study II Participants,” American Journal of Epidemiology 137, no. 2 (1993): 235–241.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources