ArticleBMJ open2017
Funnel plots and choropleth maps in cancer risk communication: a comparison of tools for disseminating population-based incidence data to stakeholders.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Cancer registries and data protection in the age of health digital interoperability in Europe: The perspective of the Italian Network of Cancer Registries (AIRTUM).Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Do emissions from landfill fires affect pregnancy outcomes? A retrospective study after arson at a solid waste facility in Sicily.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Childhood and Adolescence Cancers in the Palermo Province (Southern Italy): Ten Years (2003⁻2012) of Epidemiological Surveillance.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPopulation-based cancer registries provide epidemiological cancer information, but the indicators are often too complex to be interpreted by local authorities and communities, due to numeracy and literacy limitations. The aim of this paper is to compare the commonly used visual formats to funnel plots to enable local public health authorities and communities to access valid and understandable cancer incidence data obtained at the municipal level.
methodsA funnel plot representation of standardised incidence ratio (SIR) was generated for the 82 municipalities of the Palermo Province with the 2003-2011 data from the Palermo Province Cancer Registry (Sicily, Italy). The properties of the funnel plot and choropleth map methodologies were compared within the context of disseminating epidemiological data to stakeholders.
resultsThe SIRs of all the municipalities remained within the control limits, except for Palermo city area (SIR=1.12), which was sited outside the upper control limit line of 99.8%. The Palermo Province SIRs funnel plot representation was congruent with the choropleth map generated from the same data, but the former resulted more informative as shown by the comparisons of the weaknesses and strengths of the 2 visual formats.
conclusionsFunnel plot should be used as a complementary valuable tool to communicate epidemiological data of cancer registries to communities and local authorities, visually conveying an efficient and simple way to interpret cancer incidence data.
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.