The geographical distribution of primary biliary cirrhosis in a well-defined cohort
Open accessAbstract
The incidence of primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) varies widely between regions. However, little is known about variation within regions and the degree to which this may reflect environmental risk factors. The aim of this study was to describe the spatial distribution of cases of PBC in a defined region of Northeast England over a defined period, and to assess the magnitude of any departure from random spatial distribution. Seven hundred seventy patients with established PBC were identified in a previous comprehensive case finding study. A total of 3,044 control locations were randomly selected from postcode (zip code) data weighted for number of drop off points per postcode. Geographical analysis was performed by testing both for spatial variation in risk and local clustering by using previously described point process methods. Both tests used the same null hypothesis that risk of disease does not vary spatially and cases occur independently of each other. Statistically significant spatial variations in risk were found in the whole study region (P < .001) and in the major urban area within the region (P < .004). Risk was higher in the urban area of Tyneside than in the surrounding rural area. Within the rural area, spatial variation in risk was equivocal (P = .012), but there was significant (P = .001) clustering of cases (estimated average cluster effect approximately 10 excess cases within a 7-km radius). PBC occurred to a density of 10.7 cases/km 2 in the highest risk areas. In conclusion, PBC is unevenly distributed in Northeast England. This may reflect one or more environmental risk factors in its etiology.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The existence of disease clustering points to environmental triggers, and research has supported both infectious and chemical triggers.
“The existence of disease clustering points to environmental triggers, and research has supported both infectious and chemical triggers.22 28 57–61”
From The British Society of Gastroenterology/UK-PBC primary biliary cholangitis treatment and management guidelines (2018) · cites this paper as [58]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 166
- Authors
- Prince, M. I., Chetwynd, A., Diggle, P., Jarner, M., Metcalf, J. V., & James, O. F. W.
- Affiliations
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Lancaster University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- James, Oliver F. W.
- Venue
- Hepatology
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1083-1088
- ISSN
- 0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2092884588
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 4.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Hepatology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver Diseases and Immunity
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Spatial and Panel Data Analysis
- Keywords
- primary biliary cirrhosis, geographic distribution, spatial clustering, environmental risk factors, urban-rural differences, Tyneside, North East England, case-control study
- MeSH terms
- Demography, England, Humans, Liver Cirrhosis, Biliary, Random Allocation, Cohort Studies, Incidence, Cluster Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review