Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32467346›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2020

Methodologic Considerations in Calculating and Analyzing Proportion of Time Covered as a Measure of Longitudinal Cancer Screening Adherence.

Jessica Chubak, Melissa L Anderson, Andrea J Cook, Caitlin C Murphy, Michael L Jackson, Beverly B Green

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance among Individuals with Cirrhosis: Trends by Payer, Etiology, and Calendar Year, from a Statewide, Multi-Payer Dataset, 2010-2018.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023
    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

6 authors.

Jessica ChubakKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington. Jessica.Chubak@kp.org.ORCID 0000-0003-1630-9021
Melissa L AndersonKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0001-6744-8270
Andrea J CookKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.
Caitlin C MurphyDivision of Epidemiology, Department of Population & Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Michael L JacksonKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.
Beverly B GreenKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

Systems of Support (SOS) to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-upR01CA121125 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GREEN, BEVERLY BETH · 2007 to 2017
$8.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA121125
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProportion of time covered (PTC, or "covered time") is a longitudinal measure of adherence to preventive health services, the use of which has increased in recent years. This measure is helpful for evaluating the success of delivering screening interventions over time. However, there are challenges and nuances in computing and interpreting PTC.

methodsIn this manuscript, we describe some desired properties of PTC measures, challenges in achieving those, and potential solutions using hypothetical examples.

resultsWe propose a modified PTC measure (mPTC) to complement the standard, existing PTC measure. The mPTC measure focuses on screening completion rather than initiation when a screening modality requires more than one step; is affected less by loss to follow-up, death, or cancer during covered time than the standard PTC measure; and is not sensitive to screening episode results. We propose weighting strategies to ensure that the average PTC and mPTC are more heavily influenced by individuals who were observed for longer and are thus more informative. We further describe how PTC and mPTC measures can incorporate test indication to focus specifically on screening.

conclusionsWe recommend that studies of covered time present ample descriptive information, calculate both PTC and mPTC, describe how symptoms and indication are handled, and present multiple complementary measures, such as the proportion never screened and the proportion in need of screening. IMPACT: Common approaches, terminology, and reporting practices for covered time measures have the potential to improve the study of longitudinal cancer screening adherence.

Indexed as

AgedEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID32467346
PMCPMC7415680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.