4.7 Article

Contemporary accuracy of death certificates for coding prostate cancer as a cause of death: Is reliance on death certification good enough? A comparison with blinded review by an independent cause of death evaluation committee

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 115, 期 1, 页码 90-94

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.162

关键词

cluster randomised controlled trial; screening; prostate cancer; prostate cancer mortality; cause of death; death certification; sensitivity; specificity

类别

资金

  1. Cancer Research UK
  2. UK Department of Health [C11043/A4286, C18281/A8145, C18281/A11326, C18281/A15064]
  3. UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Health Technology Assessment Programme [96/20/06, 96/20/99]
  4. Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre
  5. Surgical Interventional Trials Unit
  6. Cancer Research UK through Oxford Cancer Research Centre
  7. University of Bristol
  8. University of Oxford
  9. Cancer Research UK [15064] Funding Source: researchfish
  10. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0513-10121, NF-SI-0509-10242, NF-SI-0611-10168] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Accurate cause of death assignment is crucial for prostate cancer epidemiology and trials reporting prostate cancer-specific mortality outcomes. Methods: We compared death certificate information with independent cause of death evaluation by an expert committee within a prostate cancer trial (2002-2015). Results: Of 1236 deaths assessed, expert committee evaluation attributed 523 (42%) to prostate cancer, agreeing with death certificate cause of death in 1134 cases (92%, 95% CI: 90%, 93%). The sensitivity of death certificates in identifying prostate cancer deaths as classified by the committee was 91% (95% CI: 89%, 94%); specificity was 92% (95% CI: 90%, 94%). Sensitivity and specificity were lower where death occurred within 1 year of diagnosis, and where there was another primary cancer diagnosis. Conclusions: UK death certificates accurately identify cause of death in men with prostate cancer, supporting their use in routine statistics. Possible differential misattribution by trial arm supports independent evaluation in randomised trials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据