ArticlePloS one2018
Mining co-occurrence and sequence patterns from cancer diagnoses in New York State.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discovering sequential patterns and interrelations among multiple diseases in electronic medical records using cSPADE algorithm.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Mental Health Comorbidity Analysis in Pediatric Patients with Autism Spectrum Disorder Using Rhode Island Medical Claims Data.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of this study is to discover disease co-occurrence and sequence patterns from large scale cancer diagnosis histories in New York State. In particular, we want to identify disparities among different patient groups. Our study will provide essential knowledge for clinical researchers to further investigate comorbidities and disease progression for improving the management of multiple diseases. We used inpatient discharge and outpatient visit records from the New York State Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) from 2011-2015. We grouped each patient's visit history to generate diagnosis sequences for seven most popular cancer types. We performed frequent disease co-occurrence mining using the Apriori algorithm, and frequent disease sequence patterns discovery using the cSPADE algorithm. Different types of cancer demonstrated distinct patterns. Disparities of both disease co-occurrence and sequence patterns were observed from patients within different age groups. There were also considerable disparities in disease co-occurrence patterns with respect to different claim types (i.e., inpatient, outpatient, emergency department and ambulatory surgery). Disparities regarding genders were mostly found where the cancer types were gender specific. Supports of most patterns were usually higher for males than for females. Compared with secondary diagnosis codes, primary diagnosis codes can convey more stable results. Two disease sequences consisting of the same diagnoses but in different orders were usually with different supports. Our results suggest that the methods adopted can generate potentially interesting and clinically meaningful disease co-occurrence and sequence patterns, and identify disparities among various patient groups. These patterns could imply comorbidities and disease progressions.
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.