ArticleJournal of registry management2024
The Importance of Training and Assessing Quality Control Reviewers in Technology-Enabled Abstraction of Real-World Data: A Case Study.
Article in Journal of registry management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate cancer registry data is crucial for understanding cancer prevention and treatment strategies. Proper education and training are key for successful quality control (QC) programs and an evaluation process is needed to assess effectiveness. Syapse developed a rigorous QC training program that includes a peer review process to assess data quality and an interrater review (IRR) program to evaluate the consistency of QC reviewers. In reviewing IRR cases, we found high rates of agreement in various cancer types: colon (97.74%), prostate (97.75%), ovarian (96.31%), lung (98.03%), breast (97.86%), and bladder (97.88%). A peer review experience questionnaire was also administered. Results indicated that the program facilitated the acquisition of new skills. Through the implementation of robust QC training and assessment procedures for technology-enabled data curation, our Oncology Data Specialist (ODS)-certified professionals at Syapse ensure data quality in a real-world evidence (RWE) platform. QC reviewers deserve an extensive investment in training and professional development to uphold data quality and support cancer research efforts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39184215PMC11343427What 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.