Skip to main content

Table 4 Comparisons of incidence and prevalence trend stability across juvenile diabetes algorithmsa,b

From: Control charts for chronic disease surveillance: testing algorithm sensitivity to changes in data coding

Algorithm All years (1975-2016) ICDA-8 Period (1975-1979) ICD-9 Period (1980-2004) ICD-9/10 Period (2005-2016) ICD-8 to − 9 Implementation Period (1977-1981) ICD-9 to − 9/10 Implementation Period (2002-2006)
OOC Count OOC Propc McNemar’s Test McNemar’s Test McNemar’s Test McNemar’s Test McNemar’s Test McNemar’s Test
p-value adj. p-value p-value adj. p-value p-value adj. p-value p-value adj. p-value p-value adj. p-value p-value adj. p-value
Incidence
 1: 1 + H or 1 + P 30 0.71 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 2 + P 29 0.69 0.63 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 3 + P 28 0.67 0.83 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 4 + P 26 0.62 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 1 + H or 1 + P 26 0.62 REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF
 2: 1 + H or 2 + P 29 0.69 0.61 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.02 0.33 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 1 + P 29 0.69 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 2 + P 27 0.64 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + P 29 0.69 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 2 + P 29 0.69 0.63 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 1 + P 27 0.64 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 2 + P 28 0.67 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 3 + P 24 0.57 0.81 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.68 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 4 + P 27 0.64 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 5 + P 32 0.76 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
Prevalence
 1: 1 + H or 1 + P 30 0.71 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 2 + P 30 0.71 0.80 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.50 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 3 + P 34 0.81 0.79 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 4 + P 29 0.69 0.63 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 1 + H or 1 + P 32 0.76 REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF
 2: 1 + H or 2 + P 25 0.60 0.17 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 1 + P 33 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 2 + P 22 0.52 0.06 0.77 1.00 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + P 30 0.71 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.00
 1: 2 + P 29 0.69 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 3 + P 35 0.83 0.61 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.63 1.00
 1: 4 + P 31 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 1 + P 31 0.74 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 2 + P 24 0.57 0.14 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.77 1.00 0.45 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 3 + P 19 0.45 0.02 0.26 0.13 1.00 0.39 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 4 + P 21 0.50 0.03 0.44 0.50 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 5 + P 26 0.62 0.24 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.50 1.00
  1. p-values <.05 are bolded
  2. OOC Out-of-control, Prop Proportion, Adj. p-value Adjusted p-value. Adjusted using the Holm-Bonferroni Adjustment Methods
  3. aIf number of observations < 10, McNemar’s exact test was used. Otherwise McNemar’s approximate test was used
  4. bValue of NA indicates results were the same as the comparison group
  5. cOOC count over forty-two