Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29079609›Full record

ArticleThorax2018

Investigation of the international comparability of population-based routine hospital data set derived comorbidity scores for patients with lung cancer.

Margreet Lüchtenborg, Eva J A Morris, Daniela Tataru, Victoria H Coupland, Andrew Smith, Roger L Milne, Luc Te Marvelde, Deborah Baker, Jane Young, Donna Turner and 15 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Thorax, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors.

Margreet LüchtenborgNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Skipton House, Public Health England, London, UK.
Eva J A MorrisCancer Epidemiology Group, Leeds Institute of Data Analytics, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK.
Daniela TataruNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Skipton House, Public Health England, London, UK.
Victoria H CouplandNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Skipton House, Public Health England, London, UK.
Andrew SmithNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Skipton House, Public Health England, London, UK.
Roger L MilneCancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Luc Te MarveldeCancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Deborah BakerCancer Institute New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jane YoungUniversity of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Donna TurnerCancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Diane NishriCancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Craig EarleOntario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Lorraine ShackCancer Control Alberta, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Anna GavinNorthern Ireland Cancer Registry, Centre for Public Health Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Deirdre FitzpatrickNorthern Ireland Cancer Registry, Centre for Public Health Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Conan DonnellyNorthern Ireland Cancer Registry, Centre for Public Health Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Yulan LinDepartment of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Bjørn MøllerCancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway.
David H BrewsterScottish Cancer Registry, Public Health & Intelligence Unit of NHS National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.
Andrew DeasScottish Cancer Registry, Public Health & Intelligence Unit of NHS National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.
Dyfed W HuwsWelsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit, Public Health Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Ceri WhiteWelsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit, Public Health Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Janet WarlowWelsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit, Public Health Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Jem RashbassNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Skipton House, Public Health England, London, UK.
Michael D PeakeNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Skipton House, Public Health England, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) identified significant international differences in lung cancer survival. Differing levels of comorbid disease across ICBP countries has been suggested as a potential explanation of this variation but, to date, no studies have quantified its impact. This study investigated whether comparable, robust comorbidity scores can be derived from the different routine population-based cancer data sets available in the ICBP jurisdictions and, if so, use them to quantify international variation in comorbidity and determine its influence on outcome.

methodsLinked population-based lung cancer registry and hospital discharge data sets were acquired from nine ICBP jurisdictions in Australia, Canada, Norway and the UK providing a study population of 233 981 individuals. For each person in this cohort Charlson, Elixhauser and inpatient bed day Comorbidity Scores were derived relating to the 4-36 months prior to their lung cancer diagnosis. The scores were then compared to assess their validity and feasibility of use in international survival comparisons.

resultsIt was feasible to generate the three comorbidity scores for each jurisdiction, which were found to have good content, face and concurrent validity. Predictive validity was limited and there was evidence that the reliability was questionable.

conclusionThe results presented here indicate that interjurisdictional comparability of recorded comorbidity was limited due to probable differences in coding and hospital admission practices in each area. Before the contribution of comorbidity on international differences in cancer survival can be investigated an internationally harmonised comorbidity index is required.

Indexed as

AustraliaCanadaComorbidityElectronic Health RecordsHospitalsHumansLung NeoplasmsNorwaySurvival RateUnited KingdomClinical epidemiologyLung cancer

Identifiers

PMID29079609
PMCPMC5870453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.