ArticlePharmacoEconomics2016
Realising the Value of Linked Data to Health Economic Analyses of Cancer Care: A Case Study of Cancer 2015.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Making Biomedical Sciences publications more accessible for machines.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2022Article
- Characterizing patients with rare mucormycosis infections using real-world data.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Health system costs and days in hospital for colorectal cancer patients in New South Wales, Australia.PloS one · 2021Article
- A Review of the Challenges of Using Biomedical Big Data for Economic Evaluations of Precision Medicine.Applied health economics and health policy · 2019Review
- Regression-Based Approaches to Patient-Centered Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- Quantifying Queensland patients with cancer health service usage and costs: study protocol.BMJ open · 2017Article
- Clinical Research Informatics for Big Data and Precision Medicine.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2016Article
- Big Data and Its Role in Health Economics and Outcomes Research: A Collection of Perspectives on Data Sources, Measurement, and Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a growing appetite for large complex databases that integrate a range of personal, socio-demographic, health, genetic and financial information on individuals. It has been argued that 'Big Data' will provide the necessary catalyst to advance both biomedical research and health economics and outcomes research. However, it is important that we do not succumb to being data rich but information poor. This paper discusses the benefits and challenges of building Big Data, analysing Big Data and making appropriate inferences in order to advance cancer care, using Cancer 2015 (a prospective, longitudinal, genomic cohort study in Victoria, Australia) as a case study. Cancer 2015 has been linked to State and Commonwealth reimbursement databases that have known limitations. This partly reflects the funding arrangements in Australia, a country with both public and private provision, including public funding of private healthcare, and partly the legislative frameworks that govern data linkage. Additionally, linkage is not without time delays and, as such, achieving a contemporaneous database is challenging. Despite these limitations, there is clear value in using linked data and creating Big Data. This paper describes the linked Cancer 2015 dataset, discusses estimation issues given the nature of the data and presents panel regression results that allow us to make possible inferences regarding which patient, disease, genomic and treatment characteristics explain variation in health expenditure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26547307What 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.