ArticleBritish journal of cancer2009
Clinical outcome data for symptomatic breast cancer: the Breast Cancer Clinical Outcome Measures (BCCOM) Project.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- What are the essential features of a successful surgical registry? a systematic review.BMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- The Use of Wearable Activity Monitors to Measure Upper Limb Physical Activity After Axillary Lymph Node Dissection and Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Observational
- Attitudes towards risk-reducing early salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer prevention: a cohort study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2021Article
- Economic Evaluation of Population-BasedCancers · 2020Article
- Ageism between Medical and Preliminary Medical Persons in Korea.Annals of geriatric medicine and research · 2020Article
- Variation in the management of elderly patients in two neighboring breast units is due to preferences and attitudes of health professionals.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2019Article
- Cost-effectiveness of population screening for BRCA mutations in Ashkenazi jewish women compared with family history-based testing.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2015Article
- Interval cancers in the NHS breast cancer screening programme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.British journal of cancer · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData collection for screen-detected breast cancer in the United Kingdom is fully funded, which has led to improvements in clinical practice. However, data on symptomatic cancer are deficient, and the aim of this project was to monitor the current practice.
methodsA data set was designed together with surrogate outcome measures to reflect best practice. Data from cancer registries initially required the consent of clinicians, but in the third year anonymised data were available.
resultsThe quality of data improved, but this varied by region and only a third of the cases were validated by clinicians. Regional variations in mastectomy rates were identified, and one-third of patients who underwent conservative surgery for the treatment invasive breast cancer were not recorded as receiving radiotherapy.
conclusionNational data are essential to ensure that all patients receive appropriate treatment for breast cancer, but variations still exist in the United Kingdom and further improvement in data capture is required.
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.