ArticleClinical epidemiology2026
Development and Validation of an Algorithm to Achieve Complete Registration of Danish Patients with Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast, 2008-2023.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2026. 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
Purpose: Registration of carcinoma in situ (CIS) lesions in the national Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) database is incomplete. We aimed to develop and validate a computer-based algorithm designed to identify patients with pure CIS of the breast, defined as CIS without concurrent breast cancer (BC), and with no history of BC or ipsilateral CIS. A secondary aim was to assess the completeness of CIS registration in the DBCG database. Patients and Methods: We developed an algorithm to identify patients diagnosed with pure CIS between 2008 and 2017 using Systematized NOmenclature of MEDicine codes from the Danish Pathology Registry (DPR). We manually reviewed pathology records of a subcohort from Aarhus University Hospital (AUH) to serve as reference standard. To test reproducibility, the algorithm was reapplied to DPR data spanning 2008 to 2023. Results: Between 2008 and 2017, 13,720 patients diagnosed with CIS of any kind were identified in the DPR. Of these, 1,581 patients were diagnosed at AUH, and 572 of those were manually confirmed as cases of pure CIS. The algorithm correctly classified 560 of these cases, corresponding to a sensitivity of 97.9% (95% CI: 96.3-99.3%). The positive predictive value of the algorithm for identifying pure CIS was 100.0% (95% CI: 99.3-100.0%). On a national level, the algorithm identified 4,302 patients with pure CIS between 2008 and 2017. Of those, 1,002 (23%) were not registered in the DBCG database. In the extended study population, 7,206 patients with pure CIS were identified, and 4,266 (99.2%) cases from the original study population were reclassified as pure CIS. Of 7,206 total patients, 1,827 (25%) were not registered in the DBCG database. Conclusion: Demonstrating high accuracy and reproducibility, the algorithm represents an optimal method for future identification of patients with pure CIS who are not registered in the DBCG database.
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.