↓ Skip to main content

Detection and investigation of temporal clusters of congenital anomaly in Europe: seven years of experience of the EUROCAT surveillance system

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Epidemiology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Detection and investigation of temporal clusters of congenital anomaly in Europe: seven years of experience of the EUROCAT surveillance system
Published in
European Journal of Epidemiology, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10654-015-0012-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen Dolk, Maria Loane, Conor Teljeur, James Densem, Ruth Greenlees, Nichola McCullough, Joan Morris, Vera Nelen, Fabrizio Bianchi, Alan Kelly

Abstract

Detection and investigation of congenital anomaly clusters is one part of surveillance to detect new or changing teratogenic exposures in the population. The EUROCAT (European Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies) cluster monitoring system and results are described here. Monitoring was conducted annually from 2007 to 2013 for 18 registries covering an annual birth population up to 0.5 million births. For each registry and 72 anomaly subgroups, the scan "moving window" technique was used to detect clusters in time occurring within the last 2 years based on estimated date of conception. Registries conducted preliminary investigations using a standardised protocol to determine whether there was cause for concern, and expert review was used at key points. 165 clusters were detected, a rate of 3.4 % of all 4823 cluster tests performed over 7 years, more than expected by chance. Preliminary investigations of 126 new clusters confirmed that 35 % were an unusual aggregation of cases, while 56 % were explained by data quality or diagnostic issues, and 9 % were not investigated. For confirmed clusters, the registries' course of action was continuing monitoring. Three confirmed clusters continued to grow in size for a limited period in subsequent monitoring. This system is best suited to early detection of exposures which are sudden, widespread and/or highly teratogenic, and was reassuring in demonstrating an absence of a sustained exposure of this type. Such proactive monitoring can be run efficiently without overwhelming the surveillance system with false positives, and serves an additional purpose of data quality control.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 18%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 39%
Computer Science 4 9%
Engineering 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Mathematics 2 5%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 8 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,299,108
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Epidemiology
#1,553
of 1,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,326
of 263,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Epidemiology
#28
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,624 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,856 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.