ArticleJournal of registry management2016
Two Suspected Worksite or Occupational Cancer Clusters Investigated Using the Cancer Data Registry and Multiple Primary Standardized Incidence Ratios in SEER *Stat-Idaho, 2013-2014.
Article in Journal of registry management, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundInvestigations of suspected cancer clusters are resource intensive and rarely identify true clusters: among 428 publicly reported US investigations during 1990-2011, only 1 etiologic cluster was identified. In 2013, the Cancer Data Registry of Idaho (CDRI) was contacted regarding a suspected cancer cluster at a worksite (Cluster A) and among an occupational cohort (Cluster B). We investigated to determine whether these were true clusters.
methodsWe derived investigation cohorts for Cluster A from facility-provided employee records and for Cluster B from professional licensing records. We used Registry PlusTM Link Plus to conduct probabilistic linkage of cohort members to the CDRI registry and completed matching through manual review by using LexisNexis®, Accurint®, and the Social Security Death Index. We calculated standardized incidence ratios (SIR) using the MP-SIR session type in SEER*Stat and Idaho and US referent populations.
resultsFor Cluster A, we identified 34 cancer cases during 9,689 person-years; compared with Idaho and US rates, 95 percent CIs for SIRs included 1.0 for 24 of 24 primary site categories. For Cluster B, we identified 78 cancer cases during 15,154 person-years; compared with Idaho rates, 95 percent CI for SIRs included 1.0 for 23 of 24 primary site categories and was less than 1.0 for lung and bronchus cancers, and compared with US rates, 95 percent CI for SIRs included 1.0 for 22 of 24 primary site categories and was less than 1.0 for lung and bronchus and colorectal cancers.
conclusionWe identified no statistically significant excess in cancer incidence in either cohort. SEER*Stat's MP-SIR is an efficient tool for performing SIR assessments, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists-recommended step when investigating suspected cancer clusters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28121313PMC7147979What 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.