Rob van Hest Capture-recapture Methods in Surveillance - RePub ...

Methodology of capture-recapture analysis
data lead to poor capture-recapture outcomes. 7,10 Dependence of sources is often a
problem in epidemiological capture-recapture applications. Such dependence can result
from co-operation between the agencies that keep the different registrations, exchange of
information or a more or less predictable flow of patients along various institutions due
to referral. The probability of ascertainment by any particular source should be equal but
in epidemiological settings often it is not, due to the intrinsic nature of human variation,
e.g. socioeconomic differences or variation of severity of disease. Also human
populations are rarely closed.
It has been argued that estimates from capture-recapture studies in epidemiology
are wholly unreliable unless supported by a wide variety of sensitivity analyses, and by
careful medical and social discussion of variability between individuals, and the reasons
why a particular individual may fail to be recorded in a particular register. Matching of
only two registers has even been called “mostly an exercise in self-deception, an
unscientific, uncritical act of faith in the absolute truth of untested and implausible
assumptions”. 10 Also for the application of multiple-source log-linear estimators for any
particular observed data on real populations some claim that “in no sense there is any
proof or re-assurance that this results in a valid estimate, or even necessarily produces an
estimate closer to the true value than some alternative approach”. 7 Although many
apparently successful capture-recapture studies have been published, only few have been
reported to have failed and confidence in the validity of capture-recapture results may
reflect publication bias in favour of successful capture-recapture studies rather than the
inherent strength of this methodology. 47
2.3 References
1. Brenner H. Use and limitations of the capture-recapture method in disease monitoring with two dependent
sources. Epidemiology 1995; 6: 42-8.
2. Wittes J, Sidel VW. A generalization of the simple capture-recapture model with applications to
epidemiological research. J Chronic Dis 1968; 21: 287-301.
3. Fienberg SE. The multiple-recapture census for closed populations and the 2 k incomplete contingency
table. Biometrika 1972; 59: 591-603.
4. Wittes JT. Applications of a multinominal capture-recapture method to epidemiological data. J Am Stat
Assoc 1974; 69: 93-7.
5. Wittes JT, Colton T, Sidel VW. Capture-recapture models for assessing the completeness of case
ascertainment when using multiple information sources. J Chronic Dis 1974; 27: 25-36.
6. Bishop YM, Fienberg SE, Holland PW. Discrete multivariate analysis. Cambridge: MIT-Press, 1975.
7. Hook EB, Regal RR. Capture-recapture methods in epidemiology: methods and limitations. Epidemiol Rev
1995; 17: 243-64.
8. International Working Group for Disease Monitoring and Forecasting. Capture-recapture and multiplerecord
estimation I: History and theoretical development. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 142: 1047-58.
9. Desenclos JC, Hubert B. Limitations to the universal use of capture-recapture methods. Int J Epidemiol
1994; 23: 1322-3.
10. Cormack RM. Problems with using capture-recapture in epidemiology: an example of a measles epidemic.
J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52: 909-14.
11. Papoz L, Balkau B, Lellouch J. Case counting in epidemiology: limitations of methods based on multiple
data sources. Int J Epidemiol 1999; 25: 474-8.
12. Hook EB, Regal RR. Accuracy of alternative approaches to capture-recapture estimates of disease
frequency: internal validity analysis of data from five sources. Am J Epidemiol 2000; 152: 771-9.
13. Jarvis SN, Lowe PL, Avery A, Levene S, Cormack RM. Children are not goldfish: mark-recapture
techniques and their application to injury data. Inj Prev 2000; 6: 46-50.
33