ArticleBMJ open2017
Comparison of ethnic group classification using naming analysis and routinely collected data: application to cancer incidence trends in children and young people.
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 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, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Socio-economic and ethnic disparities in childhood cancer survival, Yorkshire, UK.British journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Equal accuracy for Andrew and Abubakar-detecting and mitigating bias in name-ethnicity classification algorithms.AI & society · 2023Article
- Data Resource Profile: Yorkshire Specialist Register of Cancer in Children and Young People (Yorkshire Register).International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- A Scoping Review of Approaches to Improving Quality of Data Relating to Health Inequalities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Ethnic disparities in preventable hospitalisation in England: an analysis of 916 375 emergency admissions.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2022Observational
- Women in the 2019 hepatitis C cascade of care: findings from the British Columbia Hepatitis Testers cohort study.BMC women's health · 2021Article
- Impact of an influenza information pamphlet on vaccination uptake among Polish pupils in Edinburgh, Scotland and the role of social media in parental decision making.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Severe Oral Mucositis in Pediatric Cancer Patients: Survival Analysis and Predictive Factors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveInpatient Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) ethnicity data are available but not always collected and data quality can be unreliable. This may have implications when assessing outcomes by ethnicity. An alternative method for assigning ethnicity is using naming algorithms. We investigate if the association between ethnicity and cancer incidence varied dependent on how ethnic group was assigned.
designPopulation-based cancer registry cohort study.
settingYorkshire, UK.
participantsCancer registrations from 1998 to 2009 in children and young people (0-29 years) from a specialist cancer register in Yorkshire, UK (n=3998) were linked to inpatient HES data to obtain recorded ethnicity. Patients' names, recorded in the cancer register, were matched to an ethnic group using the naming algorithm software Onomap. Each source of ethnicity was categorised as white, South Asian (SA) or Other, and a further two indicators were defined based on the combined ethnicities of HES and Onomap, one prioritising HES results, the other prioritising Onomap. OUTCOMES: Incidence rate ratios (IRR) between ethnic groups were compared using Poisson regression for all cancers combined, leukaemia, lymphoma and central nervous system (CNS) tumours.
resultsDepending on the indicator used, 7.1%-8.6% of the study population were classified as SA. For all cancers combined there were no statistically significant differences between white and SA groups using any indicator; however, for lymphomas significant differences were only evident using one of the 'Combined' indicators (IRR=1.36 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.71)), and for CNS tumours incidence was lower using three of the four indicators. For the other ethnic group the IRR for all cancers combined ranged from 0.78 (0.65 to 0.94) to 1.41 (1.23 to 1.62).
conclusionsUsing different methods of assigning ethnicity can result in different estimates of ethnic variation in cancer incidence. Combining ethnicity from multiple sources results in a more complete estimate of ethnicity than the use of one single source.
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.