31 research outputs found

    Flowchart for identifying stomach adenocarcinoma cases.

    No full text
    <p>In total 105 stomach cancers (ICD-7 code 151) which occurred at least 5 years after blood sample collection were identified during follow-up. Among these, 27 were excluded due to either missing serum samples or the fact that the cancers were found incidentally at autopsy. For the remaining 78 cases, medical records related to cancer diagnosis for 68 cases were successfully retrieved. After review, 9 cases were deemed to be tumors other than stomach adenocarcinoma. Among the remaining 59 stomach adenocarcinoma cases, 15 stomach adenocarcinoma cases were determined to be cardia adenocarcinoma and 41 as non-cardia stomach adenocarcinoma. In 3 stomach adenocarcinoma cases it was not possible to determine the exact origin in the stomach.</p

    Characteristics of the stomach adenocarcinoma cases and their matched controls.

    No full text
    <p>* Defined as serum pepsinogen I<25 ug/l or pepsinogen I:II ratio <3 at time of initial serum collection.</p

    Evaluation of an Internet-Based Monitoring System for Influenza-Like Illness in Sweden

    No full text
    <div><p>To complement traditional influenza surveillance with data on disease occurrence not only among care-seeking individuals, the Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control (SMI) has tested an Internet-based monitoring system (IMS) with self-recruited volunteers submitting weekly on-line reports about their health in the preceding week, upon weekly reminders. We evaluated IMS acceptability and to which extent participants represented the Swedish population. We also studied the agreement of data on influenza-like illness (ILI) occurrence from IMS with data from a previously evaluated population-based system (PBS) with an actively recruited random sample of the population who spontaneously report disease onsets in real-time via telephone/Internet, and with traditional general practitioner based sentinel and virological influenza surveillance, in the 2011–2012 and 2012–2013 influenza seasons. We assessed acceptability by calculating the participation proportion in an invited IMS-sample and the weekly reporting proportion of enrolled self-recruited IMS participants. We compared distributions of socio-demographic indicators of self-recruited IMS participants to the general Swedish population using chi-square tests. Finally, we assessed the agreement of weekly incidence proportions (%) of ILI in IMS and PBS with cross-correlation analyses. Among 2,511 invited persons, 166 (6.6%) agreed to participate in the IMS. In each season, 2,552 and 2,486 self-recruited persons participated in the IMS respectively. The weekly reporting proportion among self-recruited participants decreased from 87% to 23% (2011–2012) and 82% to 45% (2012–2013). Women, highly educated, and middle-aged persons were overrepresented among self-recruited IMS participants (p<0.01). IMS (invited and self-recruited) and PBS weekly incidence proportions correlated strongest when no lags were applied (r = 0.71 and r = 0.69, p<0.05). This evaluation revealed socio-demographic misrepresentation and limited compliance among the self-recruited IMS participants. Yet, IMS offered a reasonable representation of the temporal ILI pattern in the community overall during the 2011–2012 and 2012–2013 influenza seasons and could be a simple tool for collecting community-based ILI data.</p></div

    Distribution of socio-demographic characteristics among self-recruited and invited IMS participants during the 2011–2012 and 2012–2013 influenza seasons and the corresponding distribution of the general Swedish population 2011 and 2012.

    No full text
    <p>*Chi square goodness of fit test participants vs. Swedish population.</p><p>**Participants who contributed with at least one <i>active</i> report. For definition of active reports, see Methods section.</p><p>***Among participants 16–95+ year old.</p><p>****Including children in age group 0–15 yrs.</p

    Bland-Altman plots 2011–2012 and 2012–2013.

    No full text
    <p>The upper graph shows a Bland-Altman plot of data from the 2011–2012 season and the lower graph shows a Bland-Altman plot of data from the 2012–2013 season. The black dots represents the differences of the weekly incidence proportions between the IMS and PBS (y) by the average of the IMS and PBS weekly incidence proportions (x). The thick blue line represents a simple linear regression model of the differences on the averages, while the thin blue lines represent the respective 95% limits of agreement. The limits of agreement for the difference between the IMS and PBS can be calculated from the equation in the bottom of the graphs, when their average is known. With the equations at the top of the graphs one system’s incidence proportions can be transformed to the other.</p
    corecore