Why they are different: Based on the burden of disease research of WHO and institute for health metrics and evaluation

Seok Jun Yoon, Young Eun Kim, Eun Jung Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives. We traced the methodology of measuring the burden of disease of IHME and WHO in detail and we would like to present various perspectives on the aspects that can be acceptable in Korea or not. Study Design. We investigate the methodology and the major outcomes of the studies of burden of disease and show the direction of our future research. We studied and compared WHO's and IHME's outcomes in aspect of the data source, methodological differences, and the interpretation ways. Results. Despite the in-depth review, there was "black box" that could not be explained specifically. But there were some estimations and using of data from developed countries which had well-developed population polls. In addition, using DisMod-MR for metaregression of IHME was different from WHO's DisMod-2. Discussion. It will be necessary to secure the validity of the claim data in order to trace the accuracy of the disease diagnosis. At last, the accuracy of the data used to construct the disease burden survey system should be promoted. To this end, we propose to introduce a cause-of-death estimation system, linking the cause-of-death report and the health insurance claiming system with the electronic medical records that the hospital produces.

Original languageEnglish
Article number7236194
JournalBioMed Research International
Volume2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018 Apr 23

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Immunology and Microbiology(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Why they are different: Based on the burden of disease research of WHO and institute for health metrics and evaluation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this