Identifying change over time in small area socio-economic deprivation

The measurement of area level deprivation is the subject of a wide and ongoing debate regarding the appropriateness of the geographical scale of analysis, the input indicator variables and the method used to combine them into a single figure index. Whilst differences exist, there are strong correlations between schemes. Many policy-related and academic studies use deprivation scores calculated cross-sectionally to identify areas in need of regeneration and to explain variations in health outcomes. It would be useful then to identify whether small areas have changed their level of deprivation over time and thereby be able to: monitor the effect of industry closure; assess the impact of area-based planning initiatives; or determine whether a change in the level of deprivation leads to a change in health. However, the changing relationship with an outcome cannot be judged if the ‘before’ and ‘after’ situations are based on deprivation measures which use different, often time-point specific variables, methods and geographies. Here, for the whole of the UK, inputs to the Townsend index obtained from the 1991 and 2001 Censuses have been harmonised in terms of variable detail and with the 1991 data converted to the 2001 Census ward geography. Deprivation has been calculated so that the 1991 scores are directly comparable with those for 2001. Change over time can be then identified. Measured in this way, deprivation is generally shown to have eased due to downward trends in levels of lack of access to a car, non-home ownership, household overcrowding but most particularly, to reductions in levels of unemployment. Despite these trends, not all locations became less deprived with gradients of deprivation largely persisting within the UK’s constituent countries and in different area types. For England, Wales and Scotland, the calculation of Townsend scores can readily be backdated to incorporate data from the 1971 and 1981 Censuses to create a 1971–2001 set of comparable deprivation scores. The approach can also be applied to the Carstairs index. Due to differences in data availability prior to 1991, incorporating small areas in Northern Ireland would be challenging

Appendicitis risk prediction models in children presenting with right iliac fossa pain (RIFT study): a prospective, multicentre validation study.

Background Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Differentiation of acute appendicitis from conditions that do not require operative management can be challenging in children. This study aimed to identify the optimum risk prediction model to stratify acute appendicitis risk in children. Methods We did a rapid review to identify acute appendicitis risk prediction models. A prospective, multicentre cohort study was then done to evaluate performance of these models. Children (aged 5\u201315 years) presenting with acute right iliac fossa pain in the UK and Ireland were included. For each model, score cutoff thresholds were systematically varied to identify the best achievable specificity while maintaining a failure rate (ie, proportion of patients identified as low risk who had acute appendicitis) less than 5%. The normal appendicectomy rate was the proportion of resected appendixes found to be normal on histopathological examination. Findings 15 risk prediction models were identified that could be assessed. The cohort study enrolled 1827 children from 139 centres, of whom 630 (34\ub75%) underwent appendicectomy. The normal appendicectomy rate was 15\ub79% (100 of 630 patients). The Shera score was the best performing model, with an area under the curve of 0\ub784 (95% CI 0\ub782\u20130\ub786). Applying score cutoffs of 3 points or lower for children aged 5\u201310 years and girls aged 11\u201315 years, and 2 points or lower for boys aged 11\u201315 years, the failure rate was 3\ub73% (95% CI 2\ub70\u20135\ub72; 18 of 539 patients), specificity was 44\ub73% (95% CI 41\ub74\u201347\ub72; 521 of 1176), and positive predictive value was 41\ub74% (38\ub75\u201344\ub74; 463 of 1118). Positive predictive value for the Shera score with a cutoff of 6 points or lower (72\ub76%, 67\ub74\u201377\ub74) was similar to that of ultrasound scan (75\ub70%, 65\ub73\u201383\ub71). Interpretation The Shera score has the potential to identify a large group of children at low risk of acute appendicitis who could be considered for early discharge. Risk scoring does not identify children who should proceed directly to surgery. Medium-risk and high-risk children should undergo routine preoperative ultrasound imaging by operators trained to assess for acute appendicitis, and MRI or low-dose CT if uncertainty remains. Funding None