期刊论文详细信息
Frontiers in Oncology
Comparison between two cancer registry quality check systems: functional features and differences in an Italian network of cancer registries dataset
Oncology
Ettore Bidoli1  Maria Teresa Pesce2  Mario Fusco3  Viviana Perotti4  Giovanna Tagliabue4  Andrea Tittarelli4  Sabrina Fabiano4  Giulio Barigelletti4  Walter Mazzucco5  Fabrizio Stracci6  Paolo Contiero7  Massimo Vicentini8 
[1] Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico (CRO), IRCCS, Aviano, Italy;Cancer Registry Unit, ASL Caserta, Caserta, Italy;Cancer Registry Unit, ASL Napoli 3 Sud, Naples, Italy;Cancer Registry Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy;Clinical Epidemiology Unit and Palermo Province Cancer Registry, University Hospital “P. Giaccone”, Palermo, Italy;Department of Oncology and Public Health, Executive Board of the Italian Network of Cancer Registries (AIRTUM), Milan, Italy;Department of Oncology and Public Health, Executive Board of the Italian Network of Cancer Registries (AIRTUM), Milan, Italy;Umbria Regional Cancer Registry, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy;Environmental Epidemiology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy;Epidemiology Unit, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy;
关键词: data quality;    population-based cancer registry;    incidence;    quality check systems;    IARC;    JRC-ENCR;    cancer research;   
DOI  :  10.3389/fonc.2023.1197942
 received in 2023-03-31, accepted in 2023-05-15,  发布年份 2023
来源: Frontiers
PDF
【 摘 要 】

PurposeThe aim of this study was to compare the functional characteristics of two computer-based systems for quality control of cancer registry data through analysis of their output differences.MethodsThe study used cancer incidence data from 22 of the 49 registries of the Italian Network of Cancer Registries registered between 1986 and 2017. Two different data checking systems developed by the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the Joint Research Center (JRC) with the European Network of Cancer Registries (ENCR) and routinely used by registrars were used to check the quality of the data. The outputs generated by the two systems on the same dataset of each registry were analyzed and compared.ResultsThe study included a total of 1,305,689 cancer cases. The overall quality of the dataset was high, with 86% (81.7-94.1) microscopically verified cases and only 1.3% (0.03-3.06) cases with a diagnosis by death certificate only. The two check systems identified a low percentage of errors (JRC-ENCR 0.17% and IARC 0.003%) and about the same proportion of warnings (JRC-ENCR 2.79% and IARC 2.42%) in the dataset. Forty-two cases (2% of errors) and 7067 cases (11.5% of warnings) were identified by both systems in equivalent categories. 11.7% of warnings related to TNM staging were identified by the JRC-ENCR system only. The IARC system identified mainly incorrect combination of tumor grade and morphology (72.5% of warnings).ConclusionBoth systems apply checks on a common set of variables, but some variables are checked by only one of the systems (for example, checks on patient follow-up and tumor stage at diagnosis are included by the JRC-ENCR system only). Most errors and warnings were categorized differently by the two systems, but usually described the same issues, with warnings related to “morphology” (JRC-ENCR) and “histology” (IARC) being the most frequent. It is important to find the right balance between the need to maintain high standards of data quality and the workability of such systems in the daily routine of the cancer registry.

【 授权许可】

Unknown   
Copyright © 2023 Tagliabue, Perotti, Fabiano, Tittarelli, Barigelletti, Contiero, Mazzucco, Fusco, Bidoli, Vicentini, Pesce, Stracci and The Collaborative Working Group

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202310101046241ZK.pdf 311KB PDF download
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:10次 浏览次数:0次