Barbara E K Klein1, Kristine E Lee, Scot E Moss, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Ronald Klein. 1. University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, 610 N Walnut St, 4th Fl WARF, Madison, WI 53726-2336, USA. kleinb@epi.ophth.wisc.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the concordance of cancer diagnosis from self- and registry reports. METHODS: Self-reported diagnosis information from participants in a cohort study was compared with linkage data from the Wisconsin Cancer Reporting System. RESULTS: Overall, there was good agreement between self- and registry-reported cancers, with 90% of all matches being considered an exact match. Concordance varied by cancer site; agreement was excellent for breast (85.4%) and prostate (78.9%) cancers. CONCLUSIONS: While self-reported cancer diagnoses for some cancers such as breast and prostate cancer are important sources of information and may be reliable substitutes when registry data are incomplete or not available, a combination of self and registry reports with mortality information may yield the most accurate information about cancer for purposes of health care planning and conducting epidemiologic studies.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the concordance of cancer diagnosis from self- and registry reports. METHODS: Self-reported diagnosis information from participants in a cohort study was compared with linkage data from the Wisconsin Cancer Reporting System. RESULTS: Overall, there was good agreement between self- and registry-reported cancers, with 90% of all matches being considered an exact match. Concordance varied by cancer site; agreement was excellent for breast (85.4%) and prostate (78.9%) cancers. CONCLUSIONS: While self-reported cancer diagnoses for some cancers such as breast and prostate cancer are important sources of information and may be reliable substitutes when registry data are incomplete or not available, a combination of self and registry reports with mortality information may yield the most accurate information about cancer for purposes of health care planning and conducting epidemiologic studies.
Authors: Ronald Klein; Barbara E K Klein; Kristine E Lee; Karen J Cruickshanks; Ronald E Gangnon Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Crystal F Simpson; Cynthia M Boyd; Michelle C Carlson; Michael E Griswold; Jack M Guralnik; Linda P Fried Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Eldin Dzubur; Carine Khalil; Christopher V Almario; Benjamin Noah; Deeba Minhas; Mariko Ishimori; Corey Arnold; Yujin Park; Jonathan Kay; Michael H Weisman; Brennan M R Spiegel Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Maya Das; Richard T Moxley; James E Hilbert; William B Martens; Lisa Letren; Mark H Greene; Shahinaz M Gadalla Journal: J Neurol Date: 2012-05-23 Impact factor: 4.849