Global insights into brain tumor registries: Lessons for countries establishing a national brain tumor registry.

IF 4.1 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neuro-oncology advances Pub Date : 2025-09-29 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/noajnl/vdaf189
Holly Wilson, Chris Tse, Sandar Tin Tin, Catherine Han, Thomas I-H Park
{"title":"Global insights into brain tumor registries: Lessons for countries establishing a national brain tumor registry.","authors":"Holly Wilson, Chris Tse, Sandar Tin Tin, Catherine Han, Thomas I-H Park","doi":"10.1093/noajnl/vdaf189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Brain tumor registries around the world have significantly contributed to the clinical, scientific, and epidemiological understanding of brain tumors. The success of these registries has prompted many other countries to create such resources for their own populations. This narrative review compares the construction, structure, and function of brain tumor registries in the United States, China, Japan, Canada, England, Australia, Austria, Denmark, and Sweden, drawing key learnings from each. Brain tumor registries from three large, medium, and small countries were identified, and their establishment, organizational structure, and primary functions were examined. This analysis found eight key considerations for establishing a national clinical registry: (1) clearly defining the aims and objectives of the registry, (2) assessing the role of supportive legislation, (3) evaluating various registry structures, (4) assessing existing registry infrastructure, (5) weighing the benefits and drawbacks of government involvement, (6) recognizing the role of specialist centers, (7) ensuring futureproofing, and (8) prioritizing comprehensive population coverage. These findings were then applied to the New Zealand context to demonstrate how such learnings can be considered by countries wishing to establish their own registry. This review provides a practical framework for nations seeking to develop similar clinical registries.</p>","PeriodicalId":94157,"journal":{"name":"Neuro-oncology advances","volume":"7 1","pages":"vdaf189"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12477469/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuro-oncology advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/noajnl/vdaf189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Brain tumor registries around the world have significantly contributed to the clinical, scientific, and epidemiological understanding of brain tumors. The success of these registries has prompted many other countries to create such resources for their own populations. This narrative review compares the construction, structure, and function of brain tumor registries in the United States, China, Japan, Canada, England, Australia, Austria, Denmark, and Sweden, drawing key learnings from each. Brain tumor registries from three large, medium, and small countries were identified, and their establishment, organizational structure, and primary functions were examined. This analysis found eight key considerations for establishing a national clinical registry: (1) clearly defining the aims and objectives of the registry, (2) assessing the role of supportive legislation, (3) evaluating various registry structures, (4) assessing existing registry infrastructure, (5) weighing the benefits and drawbacks of government involvement, (6) recognizing the role of specialist centers, (7) ensuring futureproofing, and (8) prioritizing comprehensive population coverage. These findings were then applied to the New Zealand context to demonstrate how such learnings can be considered by countries wishing to establish their own registry. This review provides a practical framework for nations seeking to develop similar clinical registries.

对脑肿瘤登记的全球见解:建立国家脑肿瘤登记的国家的经验教训。
世界各地的脑肿瘤登记对脑肿瘤的临床、科学和流行病学理解做出了重大贡献。这些登记处的成功促使许多其他国家为其本国人民建立这类资源。这篇叙述性综述比较了美国、中国、日本、加拿大、英国、澳大利亚、奥地利、丹麦和瑞典脑肿瘤登记处的建设、结构和功能,从中吸取了重要的经验教训。确定了来自三个大、中、小国家的脑肿瘤登记处,并检查了它们的建立、组织结构和主要功能。该分析发现了建立国家临床登记的八个关键考虑因素:(1)明确定义登记的目的和目标,(2)评估支持性立法的作用,(3)评估各种登记结构,(4)评估现有登记基础设施,(5)权衡政府参与的利弊,(6)认识到专家中心的作用,(7)确保未来的发展,(8)优先考虑全面的人口覆盖。然后将这些研究结果应用于新西兰的情况,以说明希望建立自己的登记处的国家如何考虑这些经验教训。这篇综述为寻求发展类似临床登记的国家提供了一个实用的框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信