ArticleEvaluation and program planning2025
A multimodal analysis of resource allocation across U.S. cancer registries.
Article in Evaluation and program planning, 2025. 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
Abstract
This study assessed resource allocation among registry activities, which may provide insight for efficient collection of high-quality cancer incidence data. We used a multimodal approach and purposively sampled 21 participating population-based cancer registries in the United States to ensure variation across several registries. The registries reported prospective staffing data and retrospective costing data, completing data collection from October 2021 to September 2022, reporting retrospective costing data for July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021. From lessons learned from prior studies, we engaged participating registries early and throughout the study, ensuring the collection of meaningful, accurate quantitative data, as well as insights not captured quantitatively. Case volume is a major driver of registry costs. (On average, high-volume registries outspend low-volume registries by nearly 3x, annually). Upon examination of registry activities by case volume, we found that the two most resource-intensive registry activities are data acquisition and data processing, which may be addressed by innovations, such as electronic reporting and automation. Innovative data transfer and processing approaches could increase timeliness of data collection and reduce the labor resources required to process manually collected data. Registries adopting these innovations might achieve cost savings, which could make resources available to support other registry activities.
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.