Defining and measuring multimorbidity: a systematic review of systematic reviews

Marjorie C Johnston (Corresponding Author), Michael Crilly, Corri Black, Gordon J Prescott, Stewart W Mercer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)
5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Multimorbidity, the coexistence of multiple health conditions, is a growing public health challenge. Research and intervention development are hampered by the lack of consensus regarding defining and measuring multimorbidity. The aim of this systematic review was to pool the findings of systematic reviews examining definitions and measures of multimorbidity.

Methods: Medline, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane were searched from database inception to February 2017. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts and extracted data from the included papers. Disagreements were resolved with a third author. Reviews were quality assessed.

Results: Of six reviews, two focussed on definitions and four on measures. Multimorbidity was commonly defined as the presence of multiple diseases or conditions, often with a cut-off of two or more. One review developed a holistic definition including biopsychosocial and somatic factors as well as disease. Reviews recommended using measures validated for the outcome of interest. Disease counts are an alternative if no validated measure exists.

Conclusions: To enable comparison between studies and settings, researchers and practitioners should be explicit about their choice of definition and measure. Using a cut-off of two or more conditions as part of the definition is widely adopted. Measure selection should be based on tools validated for the outcome being considered. Where there is no validated measure, or where multiple outcomes or populations are being considered, disease counts are appropriate.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)182-189
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Journal of Public Health
Volume29
Issue number1
Early online date5 Jun 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2019

Fingerprint

Comorbidity
PubMed
Public Health
Research Personnel
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases
Health
Research
Population

Keywords

  • Journal Article
  • DISEASES
  • PRIMARY-CARE
  • SOCIOECONOMIC DEPRIVATION
  • PATTERNS
  • HEALTH-CARE
  • PREVALENCE
  • QUALITY-OF-LIFE
  • ADMINISTRATIVE DATABASES
  • INTERVENTION
  • COMORBIDITY

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

@article{0719509d5e1e4c15bff54098b11bfd8d,
title = "Defining and measuring multimorbidity: a systematic review of systematic reviews",
abstract = "Background: Multimorbidity, the coexistence of multiple health conditions, is a growing public health challenge. Research and intervention development are hampered by the lack of consensus regarding defining and measuring multimorbidity. The aim of this systematic review was to pool the findings of systematic reviews examining definitions and measures of multimorbidity.Methods: Medline, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane were searched from database inception to February 2017. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts and extracted data from the included papers. Disagreements were resolved with a third author. Reviews were quality assessed.Results: Of six reviews, two focussed on definitions and four on measures. Multimorbidity was commonly defined as the presence of multiple diseases or conditions, often with a cut-off of two or more. One review developed a holistic definition including biopsychosocial and somatic factors as well as disease. Reviews recommended using measures validated for the outcome of interest. Disease counts are an alternative if no validated measure exists.Conclusions: To enable comparison between studies and settings, researchers and practitioners should be explicit about their choice of definition and measure. Using a cut-off of two or more conditions as part of the definition is widely adopted. Measure selection should be based on tools validated for the outcome being considered. Where there is no validated measure, or where multiple outcomes or populations are being considered, disease counts are appropriate.",
keywords = "Journal Article, DISEASES, PRIMARY-CARE, SOCIOECONOMIC DEPRIVATION, PATTERNS, HEALTH-CARE, PREVALENCE, QUALITY-OF-LIFE, ADMINISTRATIVE DATABASES, INTERVENTION, COMORBIDITY",
author = "Johnston, {Marjorie C} and Michael Crilly and Corri Black and Prescott, {Gordon J} and Mercer, {Stewart W}",
note = "Funding: Dr Marjorie Johnston was funded by a Clinical Academic Fellowship from the Chief Scientist Office, Scotland (CAF/13/03), was affiliated with the Farr Institute of Health Informatics and Research Scotland and was an honorary Public Health Registrar at NHS Grampian.",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/eurpub/cky098",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "182--189",
journal = "European Journal of Public Health",
issn = "1101-1262",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining and measuring multimorbidity

T2 - a systematic review of systematic reviews

AU - Johnston, Marjorie C

AU - Crilly, Michael

AU - Black, Corri

AU - Prescott, Gordon J

AU - Mercer, Stewart W

N1 - Funding: Dr Marjorie Johnston was funded by a Clinical Academic Fellowship from the Chief Scientist Office, Scotland (CAF/13/03), was affiliated with the Farr Institute of Health Informatics and Research Scotland and was an honorary Public Health Registrar at NHS Grampian.

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - Background: Multimorbidity, the coexistence of multiple health conditions, is a growing public health challenge. Research and intervention development are hampered by the lack of consensus regarding defining and measuring multimorbidity. The aim of this systematic review was to pool the findings of systematic reviews examining definitions and measures of multimorbidity.Methods: Medline, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane were searched from database inception to February 2017. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts and extracted data from the included papers. Disagreements were resolved with a third author. Reviews were quality assessed.Results: Of six reviews, two focussed on definitions and four on measures. Multimorbidity was commonly defined as the presence of multiple diseases or conditions, often with a cut-off of two or more. One review developed a holistic definition including biopsychosocial and somatic factors as well as disease. Reviews recommended using measures validated for the outcome of interest. Disease counts are an alternative if no validated measure exists.Conclusions: To enable comparison between studies and settings, researchers and practitioners should be explicit about their choice of definition and measure. Using a cut-off of two or more conditions as part of the definition is widely adopted. Measure selection should be based on tools validated for the outcome being considered. Where there is no validated measure, or where multiple outcomes or populations are being considered, disease counts are appropriate.

AB - Background: Multimorbidity, the coexistence of multiple health conditions, is a growing public health challenge. Research and intervention development are hampered by the lack of consensus regarding defining and measuring multimorbidity. The aim of this systematic review was to pool the findings of systematic reviews examining definitions and measures of multimorbidity.Methods: Medline, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane were searched from database inception to February 2017. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts and extracted data from the included papers. Disagreements were resolved with a third author. Reviews were quality assessed.Results: Of six reviews, two focussed on definitions and four on measures. Multimorbidity was commonly defined as the presence of multiple diseases or conditions, often with a cut-off of two or more. One review developed a holistic definition including biopsychosocial and somatic factors as well as disease. Reviews recommended using measures validated for the outcome of interest. Disease counts are an alternative if no validated measure exists.Conclusions: To enable comparison between studies and settings, researchers and practitioners should be explicit about their choice of definition and measure. Using a cut-off of two or more conditions as part of the definition is widely adopted. Measure selection should be based on tools validated for the outcome being considered. Where there is no validated measure, or where multiple outcomes or populations are being considered, disease counts are appropriate.

KW - Journal Article

KW - DISEASES

KW - PRIMARY-CARE

KW - SOCIOECONOMIC DEPRIVATION

KW - PATTERNS

KW - HEALTH-CARE

KW - PREVALENCE

KW - QUALITY-OF-LIFE

KW - ADMINISTRATIVE DATABASES

KW - INTERVENTION

KW - COMORBIDITY

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060640057&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/eurpub/cky098

DO - 10.1093/eurpub/cky098

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 182

EP - 189

JO - European Journal of Public Health

JF - European Journal of Public Health

SN - 1101-1262

IS - 1

ER -