ArticleCancer medicine2024
Capturing Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy Dose Among Breast Cancer Patients With the Utah All-Payer Claims Database Compared With Gold-Standard Abstraction.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the validity of the Utah statewide All-Payer Claims Database (APCD), we compared breast cancer-specific treatments and dosages with gold-standard abstraction of medical records. STUDY
designIn this pilot study, breast cancer treatments were abstracted by a certified tumor registrar at the Utah Cancer Registry (UCR) for patients diagnosed in 2013 with breast cancer. The abstraction of medical records was the gold standard for comparison with treatments identified in the APCD. The reliability and agreement between the treatment identified in the APCD and abstraction data were measured with sensitivity and specificity. Dose consistency was measured with the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
resultsCompared with the 186 abstractions, the sensitivity of the APCD to identify chemotherapy agents was high: 89% for any agent, 91% for carboplatin, 83% for docetaxel, 82% for doxorubicin, or 94.7% for biologic therapy. The consistency between the chemotherapy dosage identified in the claims and the abstraction varied from 63% to 76%. For radiotherapy, the sensitivity of the claims to identify the completed radiotherapy regimen was 66%. The ICC between radiotherapy doses identified in the claims and the abstraction was 54% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48%, 67%).
conclusionsEmploying these novel methods, the claims were highly reliable in identifying cancer treatment agents overall, namely carboplatin, docetaxel, and trastuzumab. The claims were of moderate utility in capturing the treatment dose information. In addition to the APCD, the use of multiple data sources improved the completeness of cancer treatment information.
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.