Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39013085›Full record

ArticleMagyar onkologia2024

[The pitfalls of lung cancer coding practices based on the evaluation of the National Cancer Registry].

Petra Parrag, Mária Dobozi, István Szatmári, András Wéber, Péter Nagy, Csaba Polgár, István Kenessey

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Magyar onkologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Petra ParragNemzeti Tumorbiológiai Laboratórium, Országos Onkológiai Intézet, Budapest, Hungary. kenessey.istvan@oncol.hu.
Mária DoboziNemzeti Tumorbiológiai Laboratórium, Országos Onkológiai Intézet, Budapest, Hungary. kenessey.istvan@oncol.hu.
István SzatmáriNemzeti Tumorbiológiai Laboratórium, Országos Onkológiai Intézet, Budapest, Hungary. kenessey.istvan@oncol.hu.
András WéberNemzeti Tumorbiológiai Laboratórium, Országos Onkológiai Intézet, Budapest, Hungary. kenessey.istvan@oncol.hu.
Péter NagyNemzeti Tumorbiológiai Laboratórium, Országos Onkológiai Intézet, Budapest, Hungary. kenessey.istvan@oncol.hu.
Csaba PolgárNemzeti Tumorbiológiai Laboratórium, Országos Onkológiai Intézet, Budapest, Hungary. kenessey.istvan@oncol.hu.
István KenesseyNemzeti Tumorbiológiai Laboratórium, Országos Onkológiai Intézet, Budapest, Hungary. kenessey.istvan@oncol.hu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The quality of input data determines the reliability of epidemiological assessments. Thus, the verification of cases reported to the National Cancer Registry is required. The objective of our study was evaluating the reliability of cases diagnosed by lung cancer, exploring the patterns of erroneous reports. The validation of the 11,750 lung cancer cases reported to the Cancer Registry in 2018 was performed with the involvement of the recording hospitals, analyzing the characteristics of reports by gender, age and attributes of the reporting institutions. 81.3 percent of the reported cases was confirmed, in 40.4 percent of the false reports, malignancy was not present at all. Among the erroneous cases women and the elderly age group were overrepresented. The highest deleted rate occurred in Borsod- Abaúj-Zemplén county. As a conclusion, there is a strong need for the improvement of the efficiency in encoding lung cancer. The most common errors: confusion of malignant-benign, cancerous-non-cancerous and primary-metastatic lesions. The reliability is not affected by the role of individual institutions in the hierarchy of health care. The availability of reliable epidemiological data is crucial in the fight against cancer, which requires broad professional cooperation.

Indexed as

Clinical CodingLung NeoplasmsRegistriesAdultAgedFemaleHumansHungaryMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID39013085
PMCPMC11870692

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.