Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20059773›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2010

Is hospital discharge administrative data an appropriate source of information for cancer registries purposes? Some insights from four Spanish registries.

Enrique E Bernal-Delgado, Carmen Martos, Natalia Martínez, María Dolores Chirlaque, Mirari Márquez, Carmen Navarro, Lauro Hernando, Joaquín Palomar, Isabel Izarzugaza, Nerea Larrañaga and 8 more

Abstract readCase ReportsValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Detection of incident breast and colorectal cancer cases from an administrative healthcare database in Catalonia, Spain.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Enrique E Bernal-DelgadoHealth Services Research Unit, Institute for Health Sciences in Aragon, Zaragoza, Spain. ebernal.iacs@aragon.es
Carmen Martos
Natalia Martínez
María Dolores Chirlaque
Mirari Márquez
Carmen Navarro
Lauro Hernando
Joaquín Palomar
Isabel Izarzugaza
Nerea Larrañaga
Olatz Mokoroa
M Cres Tobalina
Joseba Bidaurrazaga
María José Sánchez
Carmen Martínez
Miguel Rodríguez
Esther Pérez
Yoe Ling Chang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of hospital discharge administrative data (HDAD) has been recommended for automating, improving, even substituting, population-based cancer registries. The frequency of false positive and false negative cases recommends local validation.

methodsThe aim of this study was to detect newly diagnosed, false positive and false negative cases of cancer from hospital discharge claims, using four Spanish population-based cancer registries as the gold standard. Prostate cancer was used as a case study.

resultsA total of 2286 incident cases of prostate cancer registered in 2000 were used for validation. In the most sensitive algorithm (that using five diagnostic codes), estimates for Sensitivity ranged from 14.5% (CI95% 10.3-19.6) to 45.7% (CI95% 41.4-50.1). In the most predictive algorithm (that using five diagnostic and five surgical codes) Positive Predictive Value estimates ranged from 55.9% (CI95% 42.4-68.8) to 74.3% (CI95% 67.0-80.6). The most frequent reason for false positive cases was the number of prevalent cases inadequately considered as newly diagnosed cancers, ranging from 61.1% to 82.3% of false positive cases. The most frequent reason for false negative cases was related to the number of cases not attended in hospital settings. In this case, figures ranged from 34.4% to 69.7% of false negative cases, in the most predictive algorithm.

conclusionsHDAD might be a helpful tool for cancer registries to reach their goals. The findings suggest that, for automating cancer registries, algorithms combining diagnoses and procedures are the best option. However, for cancer surveillance purposes, in those cancers like prostate cancer in which care is not only hospital-based, combining inpatient and outpatient information will be required.

Indexed as

Hospital RecordsMedical Record LinkagePatient DischargeRegistriesAlgorithmsDiagnostic ErrorsForms and Records ControlHumansMalePopulation SurveillanceProstatic NeoplasmsSensitivity and SpecificitySpain

Identifiers

PMID20059773
PMCPMC2836319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.