Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37260815›Full record

ReviewJournal of registry management2022

Current and Emerging Informatics Initiatives Impactful to Cancer Registries.

Dana E Rollison, Gary M Levin, Jeremy L Warner, Rich Pinder, Lori A Havener, Madhusmita Behera, Andrew R Post, Rajan Gopalakrishnan, Eric B Durbin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of registry management, 2022. 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. Article
  2. Agreement between Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results- and Medicare Claims-Derived Uterine Cancer Treatment Data.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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
  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

9 authors.

Dana E RollisonMoffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Gary M LevinFlorida Cancer Data System.
Jeremy L WarnerLifespan Cancer Institute.
Rich PinderLos Angeles Cancer Surveillance Program, Los Angeles, California.
Lori A HavenerNorth American Association of Central Cancer Registries, Springfield, Illinois.
Madhusmita BeheraWinship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, Georgia.
Andrew R PostHuntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Rajan GopalakrishnanComprehensive Cancer Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Eric B DurbinKentucky Cancer Registry, Lexington, Kentucky.

Funding

University of Kentucky Markey Cancer Center Support Grant ECIA SupplementP30CA177558 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI Bernard Mark Evers · 2013 to 2026
$38.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA177558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer surveillance at the population level is a highly labor-intensive process, with certified tumor registrars (CTRs) manually reviewing medical charts of cancer patients and entering information into local databases that are centrally merged and curated at state and national levels. Registries face considerable challenges in terms of constrained budgets, staffing shortages, and keeping pace with the evolving national and international data standards that are essential to cancer registration. Advanced informatics methods are needed to increase automation, reduce manual efforts, and to help address some of these challenges. The Cancer Informatics Advisory Group (CIAG) to the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) board was established in 2019 to advise of external informatics activities and initiatives for long-term strategic planning. Reviewed here by the CIAG are current informatics initiatives that were either born out of the cancer registry field or have implications for expansion to cancer surveillance programs in the future. Several areas of notable activity are presented, including an overview of informatics initiatives and descriptions of 12 specific informatics projects with implications for cancer registries. Recommendations are also provided to the registry community for the continued tracking and impact of the projects and initiatives.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsCertificationHealth PersonnelHumansInformation SystemsRegistriesautomationCancer Informatics Advisory Groupcancer surveillance

Identifiers

PMID37260815
PMCPMC10229192

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.