Estimating the prevalence of problem drug use from drug-related mortality data

Hayley E. Jones*, Ross J. Harris, Beatrice C. Downing, Matthias Pierce, Tim Millar, A. E. Ades, Nicky J. Welton, Anne M. Presanis, Daniela De Angelis, Matthew Hickman

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Aims: Indirect estimation methods are required for estimating the size of populations where only a proportion of individuals are observed directly, such as problem drug users (PDUs). Capture–recapture and multiplier methods are widely used, but have been criticized as subject to bias. We propose a new approach to estimating prevalence of PDU from numbers of fatal drug-related poisonings (fDRPs) using linked databases, addressing the key limitations of simplistic ‘mortality multipliers’. Methods: Our approach requires linkage of data on a large cohort of known PDUs to mortality registers and summary information concerning additional fDRPs observed outside this cohort. We model fDRP rates among the cohort and assume that rates in unobserved PDUs are equal to rates in the cohort during periods out of treatment. Prevalence is estimated in a Bayesian statistical framework, in which we simultaneously fit regression models to fDRP rates and prevalence, allowing both to vary by demographic factors and the former also by treatment status. Results: We report a case study analysis, estimating the prevalence of opioid dependence in England in 2008/09, by gender, age group and geographical region. Overall prevalence was estimated as 0.82% (95% credible interval = 0.74–0.94%) of 15–64-year-olds, which is similar to a published estimate based on capture–recapture analysis. Conclusions: Our modelling approach estimates prevalence from drug-related mortality data, while addressing the main limitations of simplistic multipliers. This offers an alternative approach for the common situation where available data sources do not meet the strong assumptions required for valid capture–recapture estimation. In a case study analysis, prevalence estimates based on our approach were surprisingly similar to existing capture–recapture estimates but, we argue, are based on a much more objective and justifiable modelling approach.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2393-2404
Number of pages12
JournalAddiction
Volume115
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2020

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme (grant reference no. RP-PG-0616-20008), the Medical Research Council (MRC) Nationally Integrated Quantitative Understanding of Addiction Harms addiction research cluster (grant no. G1000021) and the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Evaluation of Interventions. H.E.J. was supported by an MRC Career Development Award in Biostatistics (MR/M014533/1). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care, or Public Health England.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction

Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • Bayesian analysis
  • capture–recapture
  • hidden populations
  • indirect estimation
  • multiplier methods
  • synthetic estimation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Estimating the prevalence of problem drug use from drug-related mortality data'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this