SynthesisMedicine2018
Publication trend, resource utilization, and impact of the US National Cancer Database: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Primary Brain Tumor Research Productivity in Southeast Asia and Its Association With Socioeconomic Determinants and Burden of Disease.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Pooled it
- A comparative evaluation of canine meningioma supporting the canine patient as a naturally occurring animal model for human meningioma: a report from the NCI Comparative Brain Tumor Consortium (CBTC) meningioma pathology board.Veterinary oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Adjusting for Population Differences in the National Cancer Database to Better Represent United States Cancer Cases: A Reference Tool for Researchers.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Comparison of Capture Rates of the National Cancer Database Across Race and Ethnicity.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Assessing characteristics of populations seen at Commission on Cancer facilities using Pennsylvania linked data.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2023Article
- Tops and Trends in Iranian Cancer Research: A Bibliometric Analysis.Archives of Iranian medicine · 2022Article
- Robotic minimally invasive esophagectomy provides superior surgical resection.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Racial Differences in Incident Genitourinary Cancer Cases Captured in the National Cancer Database.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- Bibliometric Analysis of the Results of Cardio-Oncology Research.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
- An Overview of Lung and Breast Cancer Using the National Cancer Database.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Article
- Role of Endoscopic Resection Versus Surgical Resection in Management of Malignant Colon Polyps: a National Cancer Database Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
- The opportunities and shortcomings of using big data and national databases for sarcoma research.Cancer · 2019Review
- Strengths and limitations of large databases in lung cancer radiation oncology research.Translational lung cancer research · 2019Review
- Patterns of Care and Efficacy of Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy in Skin-Involved Breast Cancers of All Sizes.Clinical breast cancer · 2019Article
- Common Pitfalls of Head and Neck Research Using Cancer Registries.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2019Review
- Influence of Timing Between Androgen Deprivation Therapy and External Beam Radiation Therapy in Patients With Localized, High-Risk Prostate Cancer.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe utilization and impact of the studies published using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) is currently unclear. In this study, we aim to characterize the published studies, and identify relatively unexplored areas for future investigations.
methodsA literature search was performed using PubMed in January 2017 to identify all papers published using NCDB data. Characteristics of the publications were extracted. Citation frequencies were obtained through the Web of Science.
resultsThree hundred 2 articles written by 230 first authors met the inclusion criteria. The number of publications grew exponentially since 2013, with 108 articles published in 2016. Articles were published in 86 journals. The majority of the published papers focused on digestive system cancer, while bone and joints, eye and orbit, myeloma, mesothelioma, and Kaposi Sarcoma were never studied. Thirteen institutions in the United States were associated with more than 5 publications. The papers have been cited for a total of 9858 times since the publication of the first paper in 1992. Frequently appearing keywords congregated into 3 clusters: "demographics," "treatments and survival," and "statistical analysis method." Even though the main focuses of the articles captured a extremely wide range, they can be classified into 2 main categories: survival analysis and characterization. Other focuses include database(s) analysis and/or comparison, and hospital reporting.
conclusionThe surging interest in the use of NCDB is accompanied by unequal utilization of resources by individuals and institutions. Certain areas were relatively understudied and should be further explored.
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.