ArticleGalen medical journal2019
Trend of Gastric Cancer after Bayesian Correction of Misclassification Error in Neighboring Provinces of Iran.
Article in Galen medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSome errors may occur in the disease registry system. One of them is misclassification error in cancer registration. It occurs because some of the patients from deprived provinces travel to their adjacent provinces to receive better healthcare without mentioning their permanent residence. The aim of this study was to re-estimate the incidence of gastric cancer using the Bayesian correction for misclassification across Iranian provinces. MATERIALS AND
methodsData of gastric cancer incidence were adapted from the Iranian national cancer registration reports from 2004 to 2008. Bayesian analysis was performed to estimate the misclassification rate with a beta prior distribution for misclassification parameter. Parameters of beta distribution were selected according to the expected coverage of new cancer cases in each medical university of the country.
resultsThere was a remarkable misclassification with reference to the registration of cancer cases across the provinces of the country. The average estimated misclassification rate was between 15% and 68%, and higher rates were estimated for more deprived provinces.
conclusionMisclassification error reduces the accuracy of the registry data, in turn causing underestimation and overestimation in the assessment of the risk of cancer in different areas. In conclusion, correcting the regional misclassification in cancer registry data is essential for discerning high-risk regions and making plans for cancer control and prevention.
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.