ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Reassessing the public health value of regional cancer registries in the era of Japan's National Cancer Registry: a learning health system perspective.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer registries are integral to public health infrastructure and support not only the monitoring of cancer incidence and mortality but also cancer control planning, quality assurance of screening programs, evaluation of healthcare delivery, prognostic assessment, and development of research infrastructure. Japan's National Cancer Registry (NCR) was launched in 2016, and many long-standing regional cancer registries were subsequently integrated into the national system; however, the Kanagawa Cancer Registry (KCR) continues to operate independently. This Perspective examines how a regional cancer registry can retain public health value in the era of the NCR by serving as infrastructure for a Learning Health System (LHS) that supports cancer screening quality control, regional policy feedback, and continuous improvement. The KCR contributes to screening quality control, projection of cancer care demand, and identification of region-specific challenges that cannot be fully addressed by the NCR alone. In practice, an LHS cycle linking data use, evaluation, feedback, and improvement is gradually being established through the KCR. Thus, regional cancer registries in Japan should be reevaluated not merely as repositories of statistics, but as public health infrastructures that bridge regional policy and clinical practice.
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.