ArticleDelaware journal of public health2024
Evaluating Quality of Cancer Care in Delaware using Commission on Cancer (CoC) Quality Measures, 2018-2019.
Article in Delaware journal of public health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) quality measures are used to monitor and evaluate metrics among their CoC-accredited programs, which include seven of Delaware's hospitals. The Delaware Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Public Health (DPH) also utilizes these metrics to monitor and evaluate Delaware's overall performance on these standards of care as it relates to the health care provided to cancer patients. Methods: Delaware Cancer Registry (DCR) cases diagnosed in 2018 and 2019 were selected and were analyzed separately to calculate results for each selected measure by year: HT, nBX, LNoSurg, and RECRTCT. Results: Results of the analysis showed that three out of the four CoC quality measures evaluated met the CoC standard of care for both 2018 and 2019 data. The three measures that met the CoC standards for 2018 were HT (90.4%), nBX (87.6%), and LNoSurg (93.3%). The RECRTCT measure did not meet the CoC standard for 2018 data with 71.4%. All four measures evaluated met the CoC standards for 2019 (HT - 91.6%; nBX - 85.2%; LNoSurg - 92.7%; RECRTCT - 92.3%). Discussion: A majority of cases assessed met the CoC quality measure standards, meeting standards of cancer care and treatment. More discovery work needs to be done to assess the RECRTCT metric to explore reasons why cases did not meet the CoC quality measure standards. There was notable improvement seen for the HT measure over time, where cases had not met the CoC standard in previous years. Public Health Implications: When CoC quality measures are met, medical providers can ensure patients receive effective and targeted cancer care. This practice ultimately saves resources, reduces cancer burden, impacts survival, and improves public health outcomes.
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.