ArticleCanadian respiratory journal
Pleural mesothelioma surveillance: validity of cases from a tumour registry.
Article in Canadian respiratory journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying malignant mesothelioma by a pathological survey using the São Paulo state hospital cancer registry, Brazil.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPleural mesothelioma is a rare tumour associated with exposure to asbestos fibres. Fewer than than one-quarter of cases registered in the Quebec Tumour Registry (QTR) have been compensated as work-related. While establishing a surveillance system, this led to questioning as to whether there has been over-registration of cases that are not authentic pleural mesotheliomas in the QTR.
objectiveTo assess whether registered cases of pleural mesothelioma could be confirmed.
methodsA medical chart review was designed to assess the proportion of mesothelioma cases newly registered in the QTR in 2001⁄2002 that could be confirmed. For each registered case, clinical, medical imaging and pathology information were sought and, occasionally, additional immunohistochemistry staining was obtained. Three specialists - a chest physician, a radiologist and a pathologist - reviewed the available information and material, coding each mesothelioma case as to degree of certainty of the mesothelioma diagnosis.
resultsThe QTR reported 190 incident cases of mesothelioma (81% males) for the period. The specialists classified 81% of charts as 'certain⁄probable' or 'possible' mesotheliomas, 8% as 'unlikely to be a mesothelioma' and 11% as 'not a mesothelioma'. After excluding chart summaries of unsatisfactory quality, 87% to 88% of the charts were classified as 'certain⁄probable' or 'possible' mesotheliomas, and 9% to 11% were still considered 'not a mesothelioma'.
conclusionTumour registry data are a valid source of information for mesothelioma surveillance. While there is some over-registration of mesothelioma cases in the QTR, a significant majority of registered cases appeared to be authentic. Over-registration cannot explain the greater proportion of cases that were not compensated.
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.