ArticleActa otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale2018
Cancer of the head and neck: a set of indicators based on register and administrative data.
Article in Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multidisciplinary Clinical Quality Indicators for Head and Neck Cancer: A Modified Delphi Study in Australia.ANZ journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Impact of a dedicated radiologist as a member of the head and neck tumour board: a single-institution experience.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
summaryHead and neck (H&N) tumours are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms with 5-year relative survival ranging from about 25% for the hypopharynx to 60% for the larynx in Europe. To improve survival rates, along with therapeutic improvements, it is important to standardise and optimise care received by patients with H&N tumours across different healthcare providers. To reach this goal, it is necessary to evaluate adherence to standards of received care at a population level. Published guidelines can serve as the basis to develop indicators, which can be computed from administrative health databases, measuring the adherence to specific recommendations at the individual level in unselected H&N cancer patients, identified from a population cancer register. We developed a set of indicators and calculated them in a cohort of 2007-2012 incident cases of H&N tumours in the cancer register of the Milan province (n = 1441 cases). The study cohort was mainly composed of men (77%) and patients older than 50 years (89%). Surgery was the most frequently employed treatment (66%). Ten percent of patients had no recorded treatment. Timing between cyto-histological assessment and first therapy for those having a recorded microscopic verification procedure was ≤ 60 days for 90.4% of patients undergoing surgery, 86.3% of those undergoing radiotherapy, and 90.7% of patients receiving chemotherapy. Eighty-three percent of patients underwent cyto-histological assessment in the 180 days before the first treatment. Evaluation by a pain therapist, opioid therapy or hospitalisation for palliative therapy in the 90 days before death was performed in 51% of patients who eventually died of cancer. This is the first Italian study defining and calculating quality indicators to monitor adherence to standards of care received by H&N cancer patients at a population level.
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.