Next Article in Journal
Climate Change Risk Perception in Taiwan: Correlation with Individual and Societal Factors
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Load Carriage on Measures of Power and Agility in Tactical Occupations: A Critical Review
Article Menu
Issue 1 (January) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15(1), 87; doi:10.3390/ijerph15010087

Comparing U.S. Injury Death Estimates from GBD 2015 and CDC WONDER

1
Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, 110 Xiangya Road, Changsha 410078, China
2
Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, 110 Xiangya Road, Changsha 410078, China
3
Department of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 3 November 2017 / Revised: 31 December 2017 / Accepted: 3 January 2018 / Published: 7 January 2018
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [803 KB, uploaded 8 January 2018]   |  

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of the present study was to examine consistency in injury death statistics from the United States CDC Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) with those from GBD 2015 estimates. Methods: Differences in deaths and the percent difference in deaths between GBD 2015 and CDC WONDER were assessed, as were changes in deaths between 2000 and 2015 for the two datasets. Results: From 2000 to 2015, GBD 2015 estimates for the U.S. injury deaths were somewhat higher than CDC WONDER estimates in most categories, with the exception of deaths from falls and from forces of nature, war, and legal intervention in 2015. Encouragingly, the difference in total injury deaths between the two data sources narrowed from 44,897 (percent difference in deaths = 41%) in 2000 to 34,877 (percent difference in deaths = 25%) in 2015. Differences in deaths and percent difference in deaths between the two data sources varied greatly across injury cause and over the assessment years. The two data sources present consistent changes in direction from 2000 to 2015 for all injury causes except for forces of nature, war, and legal intervention, and adverse effects of medical treatment. Conclusions: We conclude that further studies are warranted to interpret the inconsistencies in data and develop estimation approaches that increase the consistency of the two datasets. View Full-Text
Keywords: injury; death; compare injury; death; compare
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Wu, Y.; Cheng, X.; Ning, P.; Cheng, P.; Schwebel, D.C.; Hu, G. Comparing U.S. Injury Death Estimates from GBD 2015 and CDC WONDER. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 87.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top