ArticleBMC public health2025
Feasibility of acquiring occupational data from cancer patients' medical records in Malaysian oncology centres.
Article in BMC public health, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn Malaysia, data on occupational cancer are severely lacking in medical records across the healthcare system. Incomplete or missing information on occupational background, stemming from non-mandatory reporting in routine patient history taking, has led to the underreporting of cases. This study aimed to evaluate the availability of occupational data in the medical records of cancer patients.
methodsThe study was conducted from May to September 2023 in two oncology centres in the Klang Valley. These centres have different record keeping systems, with one utilizing an electronic system and the other using a paper-based system. Medical records of cancer patients were screened for availability of occupational details. Data were then collected from 962 medical records of patients with documented history of working and 314 patients were interviewed regarding their occupational history to compare with the records. Descriptive analyses of frequency for available occupational details and chi-square tests were performed with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsThe centre with paper-based record keeping system had higher recorded occupational details at 88.5%. The availability of specific types of occupational details was mostly higher among electronic medical records. The highest information recorded in medical records was for occupational classification (81.1%) and lowest for occupational exposure (0.2%), which is one of the most crucial pieces of information in establishing occupational cancer diagnosis. When comparing between medical records and interviews, only 65.3% demonstrated similarity in capturing the work classification. Additionally, 23.6% of data were incomplete or missing, and thus could not be compared. Another 8.9% showed some discrepancy in the classification.
conclusionThis study underscores the need for improvement in collecting detailed occupational history from cancer patients. Identification of possible occupational exposure is a fundamental step in determining the possibility of work-related cancer.
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.