Differences in recording of cancer diagnosis between datasets in England: A population-based study of linked cancer registration, hospital, and primary care data.
1/5 보강
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
301 patients with a recorded diagnosis of brain, colon, lung, ovarian, or pancreatic cancer between 1999 and 2018.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
Concordance does not appear to have improved over time. Combined data from primary and secondary care may be sufficient to approximate case status in CR in some circumstances, but the date we consider to represent the diagnosis may impact study outcomes.
[BACKGROUND] Differences in the recording of cancer case status and diagnosis date have been observed between cancer registry (CR) - the reference standard - and electronic health records (EHRs); such
APA
Whitfield E, White B, et al. (2025). Differences in recording of cancer diagnosis between datasets in England: A population-based study of linked cancer registration, hospital, and primary care data.. Cancer epidemiology, 94, 102703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2024.102703
MLA
Whitfield E, et al.. "Differences in recording of cancer diagnosis between datasets in England: A population-based study of linked cancer registration, hospital, and primary care data.." Cancer epidemiology, vol. 94, 2025, pp. 102703.
PMID
39612750 ↗
Abstract 한글 요약
[BACKGROUND] Differences in the recording of cancer case status and diagnosis date have been observed between cancer registry (CR) - the reference standard - and electronic health records (EHRs); such differences may affect estimates of cancer risk or misclassify diagnostic pathways. This study aims to quantify differences in recording of case status and date of cancer diagnosis between cancer registry and EHRs.
[METHODS] Linked primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)), secondary care (Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)) and national Cancer Registry (CR) data, were used to identify 14,301 patients with a recorded diagnosis of brain, colon, lung, ovarian, or pancreatic cancer between 1999 and 2018. Agreement in case status between datasets, differences in recorded diagnosis dates, and change in agreement over time were investigated for each cancer site.
[RESULTS] Between 84 % (ovary) to 92 % (colon) of diagnoses in cancer registry were also recorded in combined CPRD-HES data. Agreement with cancer registry was slightly lower in HES (78 % (ovary) to 86 % (colon)) and CPRD (61 % (ovary, pancreas) to 72 % (brain)). The proportion of CPRD-HES diagnoses confirmed in CR varied by cancer site (50 % (brain) to 86 % (lung)). Agreement between CR and HES was relatively stable within cancer sites over time. Concordance between CR and CPRD was more heterogeneous between cancer sites and over time. Best agreement in diagnosis date was observed between CR and HES (median difference 0 or 1 days, all cancer sites).
[CONCLUSION] Agreement between CR and EHR data is heterogeneous across cancer sites. Concordance does not appear to have improved over time. Combined data from primary and secondary care may be sufficient to approximate case status in CR in some circumstances, but the date we consider to represent the diagnosis may impact study outcomes.
[METHODS] Linked primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)), secondary care (Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)) and national Cancer Registry (CR) data, were used to identify 14,301 patients with a recorded diagnosis of brain, colon, lung, ovarian, or pancreatic cancer between 1999 and 2018. Agreement in case status between datasets, differences in recorded diagnosis dates, and change in agreement over time were investigated for each cancer site.
[RESULTS] Between 84 % (ovary) to 92 % (colon) of diagnoses in cancer registry were also recorded in combined CPRD-HES data. Agreement with cancer registry was slightly lower in HES (78 % (ovary) to 86 % (colon)) and CPRD (61 % (ovary, pancreas) to 72 % (brain)). The proportion of CPRD-HES diagnoses confirmed in CR varied by cancer site (50 % (brain) to 86 % (lung)). Agreement between CR and HES was relatively stable within cancer sites over time. Concordance between CR and CPRD was more heterogeneous between cancer sites and over time. Best agreement in diagnosis date was observed between CR and HES (median difference 0 or 1 days, all cancer sites).
[CONCLUSION] Agreement between CR and EHR data is heterogeneous across cancer sites. Concordance does not appear to have improved over time. Combined data from primary and secondary care may be sufficient to approximate case status in CR in some circumstances, but the date we consider to represent the diagnosis may impact study outcomes.
🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만
🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반
- A Phase I Study of Hydroxychloroquine and Suba-Itraconazole in Men with Biochemical Relapse of Prostate Cancer (HITMAN-PC): Dose Escalation Results.
- Self-management of male urinary symptoms: qualitative findings from a primary care trial.
- Clinical and Liquid Biomarkers of 20-Year Prostate Cancer Risk in Men Aged 45 to 70 Years.
- Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus multiparametric MRI for preoperative pelvic invasion in the patients with prostate cancer.
- Comprehensive analysis of androgen receptor splice variant target gene expression in prostate cancer.
- Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Surgery for Thyroid Cancer.