ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2021
Strengths and Limitations of Registries in Surgical Oncology Research.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Patterns and Prognosis of Cervical Cancer Patients Aged 65 and Older: A Population-Based Cohort Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Trends of mortality among patients with malignant neoplasms of digestive system in the United States from 2007 to 2021.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Data Sources for Clinical T1 Renal Masses and the Potential for Bias.Clinical genitourinary cancer · 2025Article
- Adjusting for Population Differences in the National Cancer Database to Better Represent United States Cancer Cases: A Reference Tool for Researchers.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Sublobar resection is associated with less lymph nodes examined and lower delivery of adjuvant therapy in patients with 1.5- to 2.0-cm clinical IA2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2024Article
- Underutilization of Systemic Therapy in Patients With NSCLC Undergoing Pneumonectomy: A Missed Opportunity for Survival.JTO clinical and research reports · 2023Article
- 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past two decades, there has been a dramatic increase in studies based on large multi-institutional tumor registries. Applications of such databases span various research themes including epidemiology, oncology, surgical techniques, perioperative outcomes, and prognosis. Although these databases are acquired relatively easily, offer larger sample sizes and improved generalizability compared with institutional data, acknowledging limitations within analysis and cautious interpretation of data is important. Questionable conclusions can result when insufficient attention is paid to issues such as data quality and depth, potential sources of bias and missing data. This article reviews research themes and important limitations of these databases. The contemporary reporting of these issues in the literature and an increased awareness among surgical oncologists of potential applications and limitations will ensure that studies in the surgical oncology literature achieve high standards of methodological quality and clinical utility.
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.