Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34464161›Full record

ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2021

Factors Affecting the Adoption of Electronic Data Reporting and Outcomes Among Selected Central Cancer Registries of the National Program of Cancer Registries.

Florence K L Tangka, Patrick Edwards, Paran Pordell, Reda Wilson, Wendy Blumenthal, Sandy F Jones, Madeleine Jones, Jenny Beizer, Amarilys Bernacet, Maggie Cole-Beebe and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2021. 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. Evaluating the use of new and advanced technologies in a population-based cancer registry.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

11 authors.

Florence K L TangkaCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Patrick EdwardsRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.ORCID 0000-0001-5022-0018
Paran PordellCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Reda WilsonCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Wendy BlumenthalCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Sandy F JonesCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Madeleine JonesRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.ORCID 0000-0002-5871-9400
Jenny BeizerRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Amarilys BernacetRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.ORCID 0000-0003-2506-5620
Maggie Cole-BeebeRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.ORCID 0000-0001-9656-5695
Sujha SubramanianRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.ORCID 0000-0003-2415-9721

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries has expanded the use of electronic reporting to collect more timely information on newly diagnosed cancers. The adoption, implementation, and use of electronic reporting vary significantly among central cancer registries. We identify factors affecting the adoption of electronic reporting among these registries.

methodsDirectors and data managers of nine National Program of Cancer Registries took part in separate 1-hour telephone interviews in early 2019. Directors were asked about their registry's key data quality goals; staffing, resources, and tools used to aid processes; their definition and self-perception of electronic reporting adoption; key helpers and challenges; and cost and sustainability implications for adoption of electronic reporting. Data managers were asked about specific data collection processes, software applications, electronic reporting adoption and self-perception, information technology infrastructure, and helpers and challenges to data collection and processing, data quality, and sustainability of approach.

resultsLarger registries identified organizational capacity and technical expertise as key aides. Other help for implementing electronic reporting processes came from partnerships, funding availability, management support, legislation, and access to an interstate data exchange. Common challenges among lower adopters included lack of capacity at both registry and data source levels, insufficient staffing, and a lack of information technology or technical support. Other challenges consisted of automation and interoperability of software, volume of cases received, state political environment, and quality of data received.

conclusionFeedback from the formative evaluation yielded several useful solutions that can guide implementation of electronic reporting and help refine the technical assistance provided to registries. Our findings may help guide future process and economic evaluations of electronic reporting and identify best practices to strengthen registry operations.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsResearch DesignElectronicsHumansNational Program of Cancer RegistriesRegistriesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID34464161
PMCPMC8664162

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.