Skip to main content

Table 5 Sensitivity analysis: 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 11 0.26 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 2 + P 12 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 3 + P 14 0.33 0.81 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.77 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.25 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 4 + P 12 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00
 2: 1 + H or 1 + P 12 0.29 REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF
 2: 1 + H or 2 + P 12 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 1 + P 11 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 2 + P 13 0.31 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + P 11 0.26 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 2 + P 12 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 1 + P 10 0.24 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 2 + P 14 0.33 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00
 2: 3 + P 8 0.19 0.45 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 4 + P 11 0.26 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.50 1.00
 2: 5 + P 12 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00
Prevalence
 1: 1 + H or 1 + P 13 0.31 0.12 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 2 + P 7 0.17 0.01 0.10 0.63 1.00 0.10 0.96 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 3 + P 21 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
 1: 1 + H or 4 + P 22 0.52 0.82 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.25 1.00
 2: 1 + H or 1 + P 20 0.48 REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF REF
 2: 1 + H or 2 + P 5 0.12 < 0.00 0.01 0.50 1.00 0.01 0.11 0.22 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 1 + P 22 0.52 0.68 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.68 1.00 NA NA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 3: 1 + H or 2 + P 9 0.21 0.01 0.10 1.00 1.00 0.02 0.33 0.45 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 1 + P 13 0.31 0.12 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.29 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 2 + P 5 0.12 < 0.00 0.05 0.63 1.00 0.06 0.80 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 1: 3 + P 20 0.48 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00
 1: 4 + P 20 0.48 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00
 2: 1 + P 21 0.50 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 3 0.07 < 0.00 0.01 0.25 1.00 < 0.00 0.04 0.45 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 3 + P 5 0.12 < 0.00 0.05 0.25 1.00 0.06 0.80 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 4 + P 5 0.12 < 0.00 0.05 0.25 1.00 0.06 0.80 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 2: 5 + P 17 0.40 0.65 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.13 1.00
  1. p-values <.05 are in boldface font
  2. Control limits set at 2*SD
  3. OOC Out-of-control, Prop Proportion, Adj. p-value Adjusted p-value using the Holm-Bonferroni method
  4. aIf number of observations < 10, McNemar’s exact test was used. Otherwise McNemar’s approximate test was used
  5. bValue of NA indicates results were the same as the comparison group
  6. cOOC count over forty-two