ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2001
How complete and accurate are cancer registrations notified by the National Health Service Central Register for England and Wales?
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mental Health Conditions and Incident Cancer: A Prospective Cohort Study of 402,255 UK Biobank Participants.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Completeness of Cancer Case Ascertainment in International Cancer Registries: Exploring the Issue of Gender Disparities.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- The International Childhood Cancer Cohort Consortium (I4C): A research platform of prospective cohorts for studying the aetiology of childhood cancers.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2018Article
- Trends and projections in adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus in England from 1971 to 2037.British journal of cancer · 2018Article
- Cancer incidence in English children, adolescents and young people: past trends and projections to 2030.British journal of cancer · 2017Article
- Relationship between paediatric CT scans and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: assessment of the impact of underlying conditions.British journal of cancer · 2016Article
- The influence of anti-TNF therapy upon incidence of keratinocyte skin cancer in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: longitudinal results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2012Article
- Primary excision of cutaneous melanoma: does the location of excision matter.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2011Article
- Influence of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy on cancer incidence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have had a prior malignancy: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register.Arthritis care & research · 2010Article
- Cancer risk among users of oral contraceptives: cohort data from the Royal College of General Practitioner's oral contraception study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2007Article
- Consistency and accuracy of diagnostic cancer codes generated by automated registration: comparison with manual registration.Population health metrics · 2006Article
- Under-ascertainment of multiple myeloma among participants in UK atmospheric atomic and nuclear weapons tests.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2003Article
- Cervical screening and health inequality in England in the 1990s.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2003Article
- Childhood solid tumours in relation to infections in the community in Cumbria during pregnancy and around the time of birth.British journal of cancer · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveTo assess the completeness and accuracy of notification of cancers by the National Health Service Central Register (NHSCR) for England and Wales.
designComparison of 720 cancer registrations ascertained from NHSCR up to May 1999 with those ascertained for the same cohort from six other sources and a pathology review of the NHSCR cancer registrations.
participantsPeople born in Cumbria, north west England, 1950-89, and diagnosed with cancer throughout the UK, 1971-1989. MAIN
resultsCancer diagnoses notified by NHSCR differed substantially from those determined by this pathology review for 47 of the 688 notified cases reviewed (7%; 95% CI 5%, 9%). Over one third of these discrepancies were attributable to failures in data capture or coding by the cancer registration system and almost half to changes in diagnosis; 26 of the 47 discrepant cases were reclassified as non-malignant and 21 as malignancies but with a substantially different diagnosis. The 694 confirmed malignancies represented 94% (95%CI 92%, 95%) of the 740 cancers ascertained from all sources.
conclusionsIt is estimated that the cancer registration system missed at least 10% (95%CI 6%, 15%) of all incident cases of malignant disease. Without additional ascertainment from multiple sources and diagnostic review, it would be incautious to use NHSCR cancer registrations as the sole basis of an epidemiological study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.