• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Follow-up of a Large Prospective Cohort in the United States Using Linkage With Multiple State Cancer Registries.利用与多个州癌症登记处的关联对美国一个大型前瞻性队列进行随访。
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 Oct 1;186(7):876-884. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwx129.
2
Active follow-up versus passive linkage with cancer registries for case ascertainment in a cohort.主动随访与基于癌症登记的被动联系在队列研究中对病例的确认效果比较。
Cancer Epidemiol. 2016 Dec;45:26-31. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2016.09.003. Epub 2016 Sep 26.
3
[The importance of the common cancer registry for the identification of cancer cases in the EPIC Potsdam-study -- results of the first record linkage].[普通癌症登记处对欧洲癌症与营养前瞻性调查波茨坦研究中癌症病例识别的重要性——首次记录链接的结果]
Gesundheitswesen. 2004 Aug-Sep;66(8-9):475-81. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-813355.
4
[Cohort study of cancer incidence in patients with type 2 diabetes: record linkage of encrypted data from an external cohort with data from the epidemiological Cancer Registry of North Rhine-Westphalia].2型糖尿病患者癌症发病率的队列研究:将外部队列的加密数据与北莱茵-威斯特法伦州癌症流行病学登记处的数据进行记录链接
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2014 Jan;57(1):52-9. doi: 10.1007/s00103-013-1880-5.
5
The Forteo Patient Registry linkage to multiple state cancer registries: study design and results from the first 8 years.福善美患者注册登记与多个州癌症登记处的关联:首个 8 年的研究设计与结果。
Osteoporos Int. 2018 Oct;29(10):2335-2343. doi: 10.1007/s00198-018-4604-8. Epub 2018 Jul 5.
6
Validity of self-reported cancers in a prospective cohort study in comparison with data from state cancer registries.在前瞻性队列研究中,自我报告的癌症与州癌症登记处数据相比的有效性。
Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Mar 15;147(6):556-62. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009487.
7
Virtual Pooled Registry-Cancer Linkage System: an improved method for ascertaining cancer diagnoses.虚拟合并注册癌症关联系统:一种改进的癌症诊断确定方法。
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2024 Aug 1;2024(65):191-197. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgae005.
8
Italian cancer figures--Report 2015: The burden of rare cancers in Italy.意大利癌症数据——2015年报告:意大利罕见癌症的负担
Epidemiol Prev. 2016 Jan-Feb;40(1 Suppl 2):1-120. doi: 10.19191/EP16.1S2.P001.035.
9
Examining the quality of name code record linkage: what is the impact on death and cancer risk estimates? A validation study.检查姓名代码记录链接的质量:对死亡和癌症风险估计有何影响?一项验证研究。
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2015 Apr;39(2):141-7. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12287. Epub 2014 Nov 7.
10
Methodological issues in linking study participants to Australian cancer registries using different methods: lessons from a cohort study.使用不同方法将研究参与者与澳大利亚癌症登记处关联起来的方法学问题:队列研究的经验教训
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2005 Aug;29(4):378-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842x.2005.tb00210.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Using LexisNexis to Improve Social Security Number Information in the New York State Cancer Registry.利用 LexisNexis 改进纽约州癌症登记处的社会安全号码信息。
J Registry Manag. 2023 Winter;50(4):138-143.
2
Linking population-based cohorts with cancer registries in LMIC: a case study and lessons learnt in India.将基于人群的队列与中低收入国家的癌症登记处进行关联:印度的案例研究和经验教训。
BMJ Open. 2023 Mar 6;13(3):e068644. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068644.
3
Key risk factors for the relative and absolute 5-year risk of cancer to enhance cancer screening and prevention.关键的癌症风险因素,用于提高癌症筛查和预防的相对和绝对 5 年风险。
Cancer. 2022 Oct 1;128(19):3502-3515. doi: 10.1002/cncr.34396. Epub 2022 Aug 3.
4
Ascertainment of Incident Cancer by US Population-Based Cancer Registries Versus Self-Reports and Death Certificates in a Nationwide Cohort Study, the US Radiologic Technologists Study.基于美国人群癌症登记处、自我报告和死亡证明的美国全国队列研究中癌症发病的确定:美国放射技师研究。
Am J Epidemiol. 2022 Nov 19;191(12):2075-2083. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac121.
5
Outcome Assessment in Epidemiological Studies of Low-Dose Radiation Exposure and Cancer Risks: Sources, Level of Ascertainment, and Misclassification.低剂量辐射暴露与癌症风险的流行病学研究中的结局评估:来源、确定程度和分类错误。
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2020 Jul 1;2020(56):154-175. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgaa007.
6
Population-Based Registry Linkages to Improve Validity of Electronic Health Record-Based Cancer Research.基于人群的注册链接,以提高电子健康记录为基础的癌症研究的有效性。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020 Apr;29(4):796-806. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-0882. Epub 2020 Feb 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Establishment of the cancer prevention study II nutrition cohort colorectal tissue repository.癌症预防研究II营养队列结肠直肠组织储存库的建立。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 Dec;23(12):2694-702. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0541.
2
Underreporting of myeloid malignancies by United States cancer registries.美国癌症登记处对髓系恶性肿瘤的漏报。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012 Mar;21(3):474-81. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-1087. Epub 2012 Jan 11.
3
Melanoma reporting to central cancer registries by US dermatologists: an analysis of the persistent knowledge and practice gap.美国皮肤科医生向中央癌症登记处报告黑色素瘤:持续存在的知识和实践差距分析。
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011 Nov;65(5 Suppl 1):S124-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2011.05.032.
4
Lung cancer risk among smokers of menthol cigarettes.薄荷醇香烟吸食者的肺癌风险。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 May 18;103(10):810-6. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr102. Epub 2011 Mar 23.
5
Melanoma underreporting: why does it happen, how big is the problem, and how do we fix it?黑色素瘤报告不足:为何会出现这种情况,问题有多严重,以及我们该如何解决?
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008 Dec;59(6):1081-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2008.08.007.
6
Participation rates in epidemiologic studies.流行病学研究中的参与率。
Ann Epidemiol. 2007 Sep;17(9):643-53. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2007.03.013. Epub 2007 Jun 6.
7
Reporting participation in epidemiologic studies: a survey of practice.报告参与流行病学研究的情况:实践调查
Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Feb 1;163(3):197-203. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwj036. Epub 2005 Dec 7.
8
Southern community cohort study: establishing a cohort to investigate health disparities.南方社区队列研究:建立一个队列以调查健康差异。
J Natl Med Assoc. 2005 Jul;97(7):972-9.
9
VITamins And Lifestyle cohort study: study design and characteristics of supplement users.维生素与生活方式队列研究:补充剂使用者的研究设计与特征
Am J Epidemiol. 2004 Jan 1;159(1):83-93. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwh010.
10
Outcomes ascertainment and adjudication methods in the Women's Health Initiative.妇女健康倡议中的结果确定与判定方法
Ann Epidemiol. 2003 Oct;13(9 Suppl):S122-8. doi: 10.1016/s1047-2797(03)00048-6.

利用与多个州癌症登记处的关联对美国一个大型前瞻性队列进行随访。

Follow-up of a Large Prospective Cohort in the United States Using Linkage With Multiple State Cancer Registries.

作者信息

Jacobs Eric J, Briggs Peter J, Deka Anusila, Newton Christina C, Ward Kevin C, Kohler Betsy A, Gapstur Susan M, Patel Alpa V

出版信息

Am J Epidemiol. 2017 Oct 1;186(7):876-884. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwx129.

DOI:10.1093/aje/kwx129
PMID:28520845
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5860149/
Abstract

All states in the United States now have a well-established cancer registry. Linkage with these registries may be a cost-effective method of follow-up for cancer incidence in multistate cohort studies. However, the sensitivity of linkage with the current network of state registries for detecting incident cancer diagnoses within cohort studies is not well-documented. We examined the sensitivity of registry linkage among 39,368 men and women from 23 states who enrolled in the Cancer Prevention Study-3 cohort during 2006-2009 and had the opportunity to self-report cancer diagnoses on a questionnaire in 2011. All participants provided name and birthdate, and 94% provided a complete social security number. Of 378 cancer diagnoses between enrollment and 2010 identified through self-report and verified with medical records, 338 were also detected by linkage with the 23 state cancer registries (sensitivity of 89%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 86, 92). Sensitivity was lower for hematologic cancers (69%, 95% CI: 41, 89) and melanoma (70%, 95% CI: 57, 81). After excluding hematologic cancers and melanoma, sensitivity was 94% (95% CI: 91, 97). Our results indicate that linkage with multiple cancer registries can be a sensitive method for ascertaining incident cancers, other than hematologic cancers and melanoma, in multistate cohort studies.

摘要

美国所有州现在都有完善的癌症登记处。在多州队列研究中,与这些登记处建立联系可能是一种具有成本效益的癌症发病率随访方法。然而,在队列研究中,与当前州登记处网络建立联系以检测新发癌症诊断的敏感性尚未得到充分记录。我们研究了2006年至2009年期间参加癌症预防研究-3队列的来自23个州的39368名男性和女性中登记处联系的敏感性,这些参与者有机会在2011年通过问卷自我报告癌症诊断。所有参与者都提供了姓名和出生日期,94%的人提供了完整的社会安全号码。在通过自我报告确定并经病历核实的378例入组至2010年期间的癌症诊断中,有338例也通过与23个州癌症登记处的联系被检测到(敏感性为89%,95%置信区间(CI):86, 92)。血液系统癌症(69%,95%CI:41, 89)和黑色素瘤(70%,95%CI:57, 81)的敏感性较低。排除血液系统癌症和黑色素瘤后,敏感性为94%(95%CI:91, 97)。我们的结果表明,在多州队列研究中,与多个癌症登记处建立联系对于确定除血液系统癌症和黑色素瘤之外的新发癌症可能是一种敏感的方法。