ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025
Validation of data quality in the Swedish quality register of gynecologic cancer for cervical cancer and vulvar cancer-a Swedish gynecologic cancer group (Swe-GCG) study.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Primary treatment and relative survival by stage and age in vaginal carcinoma: a population-based SweGCG study.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- Validation of data quality in the Swedish quality register of gynecologic cancer for cervical cancer and vulvar cancer-a Swedish gynecologic cancer group (Swe-GCG) study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPopulation-based registers provide an important source of real-world data. The growing number of large cohort studies using data from cancer registers makes validation of such registers important. The Swedish Quality Register of Gynecologic Cancer (SQRGC) is a nationwide population-based register containing data on patient and tumor characteristics, treatment, and follow-up. To ensure that the results from research and quality assurance reports using SQRGC data are robust and reliable, the accuracy and completeness of the register need to be validated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of data on cervical cancer and vulvar cancer in the SQRGC. MATERIAL AND
methodsQuality of data in the SQRGC was investigated by evaluating completeness, timeliness, comparability, and validity in accordance with recommendations from the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the national Swedish guidelines on validation of cancer registers. Completeness was evaluated by coverage relative to the Swedish National Cancer Register, and timeliness as the time from diagnosis until entry into the SQRGC. We randomly selected 276 women diagnosed with cervical cancer (n = 138) and vulvar cancer (n = 138) between 2014 and 2019 for validation. An external monitor manually re-abstracted data on 10 core variables per sub-register from the patients' medical records. Comparability was assessed by reviewing the adherence to international standards regarding coding. Validity was evaluated by the agreement between re-abstracted data and original data in the SQRGC. Correlations were estimated using Pearson's correlation coefficient and Cohen's kappa coefficient.
resultsFor cervical cancer, the completeness was 99% and the timeliness was 87.1% within 12 months. The corresponding figures for vulvar cancer were 100% and 87.9%, respectively. Adherence to international coding standards was satisfactory. The median degree of agreement between re-abstracted data and data in the SQRGC was 90.8% (range 73.2%-100%) for cervical cancer, and 85.4% (range 59.6%-98.2%) for vulvar cancer.
conclusionsThe data on cervical and vulvar cancer in the SQRGC are of adequate quality and may well be used for research and clinical purposes.
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.