Diane Ng, Wilhelmina Ross, Maricarmen Traverso-Ortiz, Sun Hee Rim, Jennifer M Wike, Angela R Moore
{"title":"评估美国中西部地区癌症卵巢治疗和妇科肿瘤医生参与的基本原理和方法。","authors":"Diane Ng, Wilhelmina Ross, Maricarmen Traverso-Ortiz, Sun Hee Rim, Jennifer M Wike, Angela R Moore","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>A study was conducted to examine treatment patterns and outcomes among women with a primary ovarian cancer diagnosis in the Midwest region of the United States, an area that has relatively fewer gynecologic oncologists (GOs) and diverse geography with respect to urban and rural areas. In this paper, we examine the methodology of working with central cancer registries (CCRs) to collect additional data items, including those related to GO involvement and detailed treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Westat recruited 3 state CCRs from the Midwest to participate in the study. Cases were randomly selected from 2010-2012 ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer diagnoses in participating registry databases that met the selection criteria. CCRs abstracted additional information for selected cases, including study-specific data items regarding surgery and chemotherapy, GO involvement, and recurrence, where applicable.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Abstracts with study-specific data items were collected among a total of 1,003 incidence ovarian cancer cases, with 432 additional abstracts for those cases identified as having recurrence. Variables with the highest frequency of unknowns were mostly for patients who had chemotherapy. While data were available for whether the patient received chemotherapy, the specifics about that chemotherapy were not always available, with dosing and unit being unknown in 27% of cases. There were several challenges with initiating and completing this study associated with recruitment, the data collection timeline, and the collection of study-specific data items.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This paper outlines the methodologic approach and experience of collecting additional surgical and chemotherapy treatment variables and data on GO involvement in care from medical records. Experiences from this study provide critical lessons that can be applied to future data collection in this area. Ultimately, the accurate collection of these elements enables researchers to identify groups of women who are not receiving the benefit of optimal surgery or GO care and provides critical data on interventions for improved outcomes and survival in ovarian cancer patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":39246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of registry management","volume":"50 3","pages":"85-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629802/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rationale and Methodologic Approach for Assessing Ovarian Cancer Treatment and Gynecologic Oncologist Involvement in the Midwest Region of the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Diane Ng, Wilhelmina Ross, Maricarmen Traverso-Ortiz, Sun Hee Rim, Jennifer M Wike, Angela R Moore\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>A study was conducted to examine treatment patterns and outcomes among women with a primary ovarian cancer diagnosis in the Midwest region of the United States, an area that has relatively fewer gynecologic oncologists (GOs) and diverse geography with respect to urban and rural areas. In this paper, we examine the methodology of working with central cancer registries (CCRs) to collect additional data items, including those related to GO involvement and detailed treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Westat recruited 3 state CCRs from the Midwest to participate in the study. Cases were randomly selected from 2010-2012 ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer diagnoses in participating registry databases that met the selection criteria. CCRs abstracted additional information for selected cases, including study-specific data items regarding surgery and chemotherapy, GO involvement, and recurrence, where applicable.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Abstracts with study-specific data items were collected among a total of 1,003 incidence ovarian cancer cases, with 432 additional abstracts for those cases identified as having recurrence. Variables with the highest frequency of unknowns were mostly for patients who had chemotherapy. While data were available for whether the patient received chemotherapy, the specifics about that chemotherapy were not always available, with dosing and unit being unknown in 27% of cases. There were several challenges with initiating and completing this study associated with recruitment, the data collection timeline, and the collection of study-specific data items.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This paper outlines the methodologic approach and experience of collecting additional surgical and chemotherapy treatment variables and data on GO involvement in care from medical records. Experiences from this study provide critical lessons that can be applied to future data collection in this area. Ultimately, the accurate collection of these elements enables researchers to identify groups of women who are not receiving the benefit of optimal surgery or GO care and provides critical data on interventions for improved outcomes and survival in ovarian cancer patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of registry management\",\"volume\":\"50 3\",\"pages\":\"85-91\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629802/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of registry management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of registry management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Rationale and Methodologic Approach for Assessing Ovarian Cancer Treatment and Gynecologic Oncologist Involvement in the Midwest Region of the United States.
Introduction: A study was conducted to examine treatment patterns and outcomes among women with a primary ovarian cancer diagnosis in the Midwest region of the United States, an area that has relatively fewer gynecologic oncologists (GOs) and diverse geography with respect to urban and rural areas. In this paper, we examine the methodology of working with central cancer registries (CCRs) to collect additional data items, including those related to GO involvement and detailed treatment.
Methods: Westat recruited 3 state CCRs from the Midwest to participate in the study. Cases were randomly selected from 2010-2012 ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer diagnoses in participating registry databases that met the selection criteria. CCRs abstracted additional information for selected cases, including study-specific data items regarding surgery and chemotherapy, GO involvement, and recurrence, where applicable.
Results: Abstracts with study-specific data items were collected among a total of 1,003 incidence ovarian cancer cases, with 432 additional abstracts for those cases identified as having recurrence. Variables with the highest frequency of unknowns were mostly for patients who had chemotherapy. While data were available for whether the patient received chemotherapy, the specifics about that chemotherapy were not always available, with dosing and unit being unknown in 27% of cases. There were several challenges with initiating and completing this study associated with recruitment, the data collection timeline, and the collection of study-specific data items.
Conclusion: This paper outlines the methodologic approach and experience of collecting additional surgical and chemotherapy treatment variables and data on GO involvement in care from medical records. Experiences from this study provide critical lessons that can be applied to future data collection in this area. Ultimately, the accurate collection of these elements enables researchers to identify groups of women who are not receiving the benefit of optimal surgery or GO care and provides critical data on interventions for improved outcomes and survival in ovarian cancer patients.