ArticleJournal of cancer epidemiology2018
Validity of Administrative Databases in Comparison to Medical Charts for Breast Cancer Treatment Data.
Article in Journal of cancer epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mortality following cancer diagnosis among people with non-affective psychoses: mediation by stage at diagnosis and time to treatment initiation.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2026Article
- Treatment and Mortality Following Cancer Diagnosis Among People With Non-affective Psychotic Disorders in Ontario, Canada: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2024Article
- Treatment, healthcare utilization and outcomes in patients with glioblastoma in Ontario: a 10-year cohort study.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2024Article
- Variation in Access to Palliative Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Study in Canada.Cureus · 2024Article
- Population-based analysis of perioperative chemotherapy use, interventions requiring hospitalization and atheroembolic events among patients with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMedical chart abstraction is the gold standard for collecting breast cancer treatment data for monitoring and research. A less costly alternative is the use of administrative databases. This study will evaluate administrative data in comparison to medical charts for breast cancer treatment information. STUDY DESIGN AND
settingA retrospective cohort design identified 2,401 women in the Ontario Breast Screening Program diagnosed with invasive breast cancer from 2006 to 2009. Treatment data were obtained from the Activity Level Reporting and Canadian Institute of Health Information databases. Medical charts were abstracted at cancer centres. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and kappa were calculated for receipt and type of treatment, and agreement was assessed for dates. Logistic regression evaluated factors influencing agreement.
resultsSensitivity and specificity for receipt of radiotherapy (92.0%, 99.3%), chemotherapy (77.7%, 99.2%), and surgery (95.8%, 100%) were high but decreased slightly for specific radiotherapy anatomic locations, chemotherapy protocols, and surgeries. Agreement increased by radiotherapy year (trend test,
conclusionAdministrative data can be accurately utilized for future breast cancer treatment studies.
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.