 |
 |
>I can't begin to count the number of times I've seen the number of = Parkies in >the US alone estimated as "between 500,000 and 1,500,000." That's NOT = what >I'd call an accurate estimate!! > >Anybody care to take a guess at how many PWP's there REALLY are in the = USA and >Canada??? I bet it's numbered in the several millions, when you count = those Hi Barbara, We are just getting down to compiling the final statistics in our = research. We interviewed 100 from a list of 120 in our area. This was = generaly accepted to be about half of the total of people with PD in the = area (Central West of NSW, Australia). The total population of the area = was accepted to be 170,000. So the prevalence of PD was thought to be = about 240 in 170,000, or about 140 per 10(5) - that is, 140 in = 100,000. BUT, we carried out a mailing program to GP's in the area, AND of the = 70% who replied, 370 PD patients were reported. So it may well be that = the total number of people with *diagnosed* PD, *confimed* by a = neurologist, could be as high as (370 / 70 x 100) or 528!! Rather a = difference to our +/240, hey? THEN we did an analysis of the 1996 Australian Census, which showed a = total population for the area in question (as defined by Local = Government Area boundaries) of 220,000, not 170,000 as previously = thought! So that the prevalence (in a basically rural area with a number of = cities with 30,000+/ pop.) could be as high as (528 /2.2) or 240 per = 10(5). Translated to the US pop. of about 270m, this could mean = (270,000,000 / 100,000 x 240) or about 1.4m, which approaches the 1.5m = hypothesised. Research figures I have trawled from Medline show, per 10(5) Dunedin NZ - 110 Wellington NZ - 100 Aberdeen, Scotland - 103 Germany - 1000 (of 65+ year-olds) China - 15 (?) Sweden - 115 Taiwan - 935 (of 50+ ear-olds. You can see by the German and Taiwanese figures that when one consides = the age factor, figures can increase abruptly. Then there are two terms = to consider, which to the lay person usually mean the same thing, = 'prevalence' and 'incidence'. Prevalence is usually the raw figure, eg, = 150 with PD in a total sample of 100,000 would give a raw prevalence of = 150/10(5). Incidence is measured in 'person years', and usually comes = out around 1-1.5/10(5). Clear? <grin> Thus endeth the lesson. Figures quoted by the World Health Organisation are wild, to say the = least, as they bracket Canada, the US, Mexico, Central America and all = of South America as "The Ameicas", and Australia, New Zealand, and the = islands of the western Pacific as "Oceania"! =20 To quote from Zhang ZX, Roman GC, in Neuroepidemiology = 1993;12(4):195-208 ; "Comparison of Parkinson's disease (PD) prevalence and incidence in = various parts of the world is difficult because methods of case = ascertainment, diagnostic criteria, classification, medical facilities, = and age distribution of the populations vary broadly in different = studies..." Ain't it the truth! Jim [59/13 Sinemet, Eldepryl] ---------------------------------------------- Jim Slattery - [log in to unmask] CW PD Web - [log in to unmask] http://www.bec.net.au/~cwpdg/ ----------------------------------------------