Dataset Information

Regional differences in prediction models of lung function in Germany.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Little is known about the influencing potential of specific characteristics on lung function in different populations. The aim of this analysis was to determine whether lung function determinants differ between subpopulations within Germany and whether prediction equations developed for one subpopulation are also adequate for another subpopulation.

Methods

Within three studies (KORA C, SHIP-I, ECRHS-I) in different areas of Germany 4059 adults performed lung function tests. The available data consisted of forced expiratory volume in one second, forced vital capacity and peak expiratory flow rate. For each study multivariate regression models were developed to predict lung function and Bland-Altman plots were established to evaluate the agreement between predicted and measured values.

Results

The final regression equations for FEV1 and FVC showed adjusted r-square values between 0.65 and 0.75, and for PEF they were between 0.46 and 0.61. In all studies gender, age, height and pack-years were significant determinants, each with a similar effect size. Regarding other predictors there were some, although not statistically significant, differences between the studies. Bland-Altman plots indicated that the regression models for each individual study adequately predict medium (i.e. normal) but not extremely high or low lung function values in the whole study population.

Conclusions

Simple models with gender, age and height explain a substantial part of lung function variance whereas further determinants add less than 5% to the total explained r-squared, at least for FEV1 and FVC. Thus, for different adult subpopulations of Germany one simple model for each lung function measures is still sufficient.

SUBMITTER: Schnabel E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2873930 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:For Germany, regional differences for various health indicators, which are also associated with socioeconomic factors, have been documented. This article aims to develop a regional socioeconomic deprivation index for Germany that (1) can be used to analyse regional socioeconomic inequalities in health and (2) provides a basis for explaining regional health differences in Germany. The core data stem from the INKAR (indicators and maps on spatial and urban development in Germany and Europe) database compiled by Germany's Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development. Factor analysis is used for indexing and the weighting of indicators for the three dimensions of education, occupation and income. The German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation (GISD) is generated at the levels of associations of municipalities, administrative districts and administrative regions for the years 1998, 2003, 2008 and 2012. Aggregate data and individual data from the German Health Update 2014/2015-EHIS (GEDA 2014/2015-EHIS) study are used to analyse associations between the index and selected health indicators. For around two thirds of the causes of death, the German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation reveals significant socioeconomic inequalities at the level of Germany's administrative regions. At district level, life expectancy in the bottom fifth of districts presenting the highest levels of deprivation is, depending on the observation period, 1.3 years lower for women and 2.6 years lower for men in comparison to the upper fifth of districts presenting the lowest levels of deprivation. The index can explain 45.5% and 62.2% of regional differences in life expectancy for women and men, respectively. Moreover, the population in regions characterised by high levels of deprivation has significantly higher rates of smokers, engages less frequently in leisure-time physical activities and is more often obese. The German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation illustrates regional socioeconomic differences at different spatial levels and contributes to explaining regional health differences. This index is intended for use in research as well as by federal and federal state health reporting systems and should enable access to new sources of data for investigating the links between social inequalities and health in Germany.

Project description:Established vaccine hesitancy measurement instruments, such as the Vaccine Hesitancy Determinants Matrix, are not sufficiently equipped to adequately and consistently measure political and ideological attitudes. Focusing on Germany, which is a particularly interesting case since it witnessed the establishment of the by far most well-organized and sustained 'anti-Covid' movement in Europe, this quantitative study explores the impact of political ideology and partisanship on the degree of vaccine hesitancy based on four surveys (February-October 2021) among more than 30,000 individuals. We demonstrate that party affiliation, political ideology and region of residence all impact vaccine hesitancy. In fact, they turn out to have a greater impact than two factors often analysed with respect to vaccine hesitancy: gender and educational background. Further interaction models show that the effect of political ideology on vaccine hesitancy is moderated by age, gender and region of residency. For instance, while the more rightwing a young individual is, the more hesitant they are towards SARS-CoV-2 vaccination-for older individuals, this is not the case. Our findings are relevant for future investigators measuring vaccine hesitancy and policy makers contemplating the differential impact of complex public health interventions: as the impact of political and ideological attitudes on vaccine hesitancy are not adequately captured by established vaccine hesitancy measurement instruments, we recommend its modification to include a clear and harmonised definition of the political-ideological dimension of vaccine hesitancy together with pre-validated measurement items that improve future studies. In addition, we reason that vaccine hesitancy, while being an outcome of complex socio-political factors, is in itself an indicator for societal cohesion and anomie, the degree of which is associated with trust in (health) policy makers, (public) health authorities, health service providers, etc. Therefore, we further recommend that vaccine hesitancy questions should be integrated in pertinent national surveys.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of our study was to explore patient types in general practitioner (GP) practices and to quantify the regional differences of the frequencies of these patient types in northern Germany.Design and settingWe conducted a mixed-methods study based on focus groups and standardised interviews with GPs. All counties and independent cities within a radius of 120 km around Hamburg were assigned one of three regional categories (urban areas, environs, rural areas). The focus groups were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Relative frequencies of consultations by patient types and differences between the regions were calculated. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify differences among regions.ParticipantsNine focus groups with 65 GPs (67.7% male). From the 280 initially recruited GPs 211 (65.4% male) could be personally interviewed.ResultsFour themes with 27 patient types were derived from the focus groups: patients classified by morbidity, sociodemographic characteristics, special care needs and patient behaviour. Five patient characteristics were significantly more prevalent in urban areas than rural areas: patients with migration background and culturally different disease concepts (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.42), privately insured patients (OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31), educationally disadvantaged patients with low health literacy (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.19), patients with psychiatric disorders (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12) and senior citizens living on their own without caregivers (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31). Three patient types were significantly less prevalent in urban areas: minors accompanied by their parents (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.83), patients with poor therapy adherence (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95) and patients with dementia (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99).ConclusionsGPs could compensate the specific needs of their patients with medical training aligned with the requirements of their region. Urban GPs need skills treating patients with psychiatric, social and cultural problems, rural GPs regarding the care for children or noncompliant patients.Trial registration numberNCT02558322.