Suppr超能文献

的里雅斯特死亡证明诊断与尸检报告的比较:妇科癌症

Comparison between diagnoses on death certificates and autopsy reports in Trieste: gynaecological cancers.

作者信息

Di Bonito L, Stanta G, Delendi M, Peruzzo P, Gardiman D, Cocchi A, Patriarca S, Giarelli L

机构信息

Institute of Pathological Anatomy and Histology, University of Trieste, Italy.

出版信息

IARC Sci Publ. 1991(112):63-71.

PMID:1855951
Abstract

We have compared autopsy results with the diagnosis reported on 759 death certificates for gynaecological cancers. High levels of discrepancies were noted for all sites. Surprisingly, complete agreement between death certificates and autopsy reports was found for only 30% of cervical and corpus tumours and for 50% of ovarian tumours. This low level of agreement was due partly to the poor quality of death certificates of older women. No difference in accuracy was found over the 15-year period considered. The most obvious causes of the discrepancies were of two types. The first was erroneous interpretation of codes; confusion between 180 (cervix) and 182 (corpus) was very frequent. The second type was associated with clinical factors, such as confusion of anatomical site, adjacent organs or metastases being diagnosed as primary tumours. A relatively frequent cause of inaccuracy on death certificates was consideration of patients who had been cured of a cancer as having died of the disease.

摘要

我们将尸检结果与759份妇科癌症死亡证明上报告的诊断进行了比较。所有部位的差异程度都很高。令人惊讶的是,死亡证明与尸检报告完全一致的情况仅在30%的宫颈癌和子宫体癌病例以及50%的卵巢癌病例中出现。这种低一致性部分归因于老年女性死亡证明质量较差。在所考虑的15年期间,准确性没有差异。差异的最明显原因有两种。第一种是对编码的错误解读;180(子宫颈)和182(子宫体)之间的混淆非常常见。第二种与临床因素有关,例如解剖部位的混淆、相邻器官或被诊断为原发性肿瘤的转移灶。死亡证明不准确的一个相对常见原因是将已治愈癌症的患者视为死于该疾病。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验