[Data quality or differences in oncological care? - standards of reporting for cancer survival analyses based on registry data].
| Autor: | Nennecke A; Behörde für Gesundheit und Verbraucherschutz, Hamburgisches Krebsregister, Hamburg. Alice.Nennecke@bgv.hamburg.de, Barnes B, Brenner H, Eberle A, Emrich K, Eisemann N, Geiss K, Hentschel S, Holleczek B, Kraywinkel K, Stabenow R, Hense HW |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | němčina |
| Zdroj: | Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) [Gesundheitswesen] 2013 Feb; Vol. 75 (2), pp. 94-8. Date of Electronic Publication: 2012 May 11. |
| DOI: | 10.1055/s-0032-1311622 |
| Abstrakt: | Background: The results of population-based cancer survival analyses are essential criteria with regard to the evaluation of oncological care. Their use and their interpretation as such require knowledge and transparency with regard to the data basis in order to avoid inadequate conclusions. Method: The working group 'survival analysis' of the Association of Population-Based Cancer Registries in Germany (GEKID) has identified factors within cancer registration and data evaluation which may distort population-based cancer survival analyses to a relevant degree. Recommendations in terms of standards of reporting were developed by mutual consent following empirical studies and discussions within GEKID. Results: We provide a list of 17 indicators to be taken into account and to be presented within the scope of population-based survival analyses. Conclusions: Referring to the "standards of reporting concerning population-based cancer survival analyses" introduced by GEKID there is a proposal on data transparency on hand, which might contribute substantially to the assessability of outcome quality in oncological care. (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|