Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33836666›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical research methodology2021

Impact of comorbidity assessment methods to predict non-cancer mortality risk in cancer patients: a retrospective observational study using the National Health Insurance Service claims-based data in Korea.

Sanghee Lee, Yoon Jung Chang, Hyunsoon Cho

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC medical research methodology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Sanghee LeeDepartment of Cancer Control and Population Health, Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, 323 Ilsan-ro, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang, 10408, Republic of Korea.
Yoon Jung ChangDepartment of Cancer Control and Population Health, Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, 323 Ilsan-ro, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang, 10408, Republic of Korea.
Hyunsoon ChoDepartment of Cancer Control and Population Health, Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, National Cancer Center, 323 Ilsan-ro, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang, 10408, Republic of Korea. hscho@ncc.re.kr.ORCID 0000-0002-3261-3114

Funding

National Cancer Center (Korea) 1710300-3National Cancer Center (Korea) NCC-2110450-1National Research Foundation (Korea) NRF-2020R1A2C1A01011584
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer patients' prognoses are complicated by comorbidities. Prognostic prediction models with inappropriate comorbidity adjustments yield biased survival estimates. However, an appropriate claims-based comorbidity risk assessment method remains unclear. This study aimed to compare methods used to capture comorbidities from claims data and predict non-cancer mortality risks among cancer patients.

methodsData were obtained from the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort database in Korea; 2979 cancer patients diagnosed in 2006 were considered. Claims-based Charlson Comorbidity Index was evaluated according to the various assessment methods: different periods in washout window, lookback, and claim types. The prevalence of comorbidities and associated non-cancer mortality risks were compared. The Cox proportional hazards models considering left-truncation were used to estimate the non-cancer mortality risks.

resultsThe prevalence of peptic ulcer, the most common comorbidity, ranged from 1.5 to 31.0%, and the proportion of patients with ≥1 comorbidity ranged from 4.5 to 58.4%, depending on the assessment methods. Outpatient claims captured 96.9% of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; however, they captured only 65.2% of patients with myocardial infarction. The different assessment methods affected non-cancer mortality risks; for example, the hazard ratios for patients with moderate comorbidity (CCI 3-4) varied from 1.0 (95% CI: 0.6-1.6) to 5.0 (95% CI: 2.7-9.3). Inpatient claims resulted in relatively higher estimates reflective of disease severity.

conclusionsThe prevalence of comorbidities and associated non-cancer mortality risks varied considerably by the assessment methods. Researchers should understand the complexity of comorbidity assessments in claims-based risk assessment and select an optimal approach.

Indexed as

National Health ProgramsNeoplasmsCohort StudiesComorbidityHumansRepublic of KoreaRetrospective StudiesCancerCharlson comorbidity indexClaims dataComorbidityMortalityNon-cancerPrognosis prediction

Identifiers

PMID33836666
PMCPMC8035736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.