These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21462882)

  • 21. Evaluation of data quality in the cancer registry: principles and methods. Part I: comparability, validity and timeliness.
    Bray F; Parkin DM
    Eur J Cancer; 2009 Mar; 45(5):747-55. PubMed ID: 19117750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of data quality in the cancer registry: principles and methods Part II. Completeness.
    Parkin DM; Bray F
    Eur J Cancer; 2009 Mar; 45(5):756-64. PubMed ID: 19128954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Reliability of cancer registration data in Scotland, 1997.
    Brewster DH; Stockton D; Harvey J; Mackay M
    Eur J Cancer; 2002 Feb; 38(3):414-7. PubMed ID: 11818208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Completeness of a newly implemented general cancer registry in northern France: Application of a three-source capture-recapture method.
    Plouvier SD; Bernillon P; Ligier K; Theis D; Miquel PH; Pasquier D; Rivest LP
    Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 2019 Jul; 67(4):239-245. PubMed ID: 31146902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Surveillance Evaluation of the National Cancer Registry in Sabah, Malaysia.
    Jeffree SM; Mihat O; Lukman KA; Ibrahim MY; Kamaludin F; Hassan MR; Kaur N; Myint T
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2016; 17(7):3123-9. PubMed ID: 27509940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparability and Quality Control in Cancer Registration; Karachi (data monitoring 1995-2001).
    Bhurgri Y; Bhurgri A; Hasan SH
    J Pak Med Assoc; 2002 Jul; 52(7):301-7. PubMed ID: 12481661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Epidemiological data sources in Estonia: a survey of registries and databases.
    Innos K; Rahu M
    J Epidemiol Biostat; 2000; 5(5):293-302. PubMed ID: 11142605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The added value of claims for cancer surveillance: results of varying case definitions.
    Penberthy L; McClish D; Manning C; Retchin S; Smith T
    Med Care; 2005 Jul; 43(7):705-12. PubMed ID: 15970786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Unintended Consequences of Expanding Electronic Pathology Reporting: The Inverse Relationship Between Data Completeness and Data Quality.
    Hill SM; Li J; Pawlish K; Paddock LE; Stroup AM
    J Registry Manag; 2020; 47(3):122-126. PubMed ID: 34128918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Impact of automated data collection from urology offices: improving incidence and treatment reporting in urologic cancers.
    Penberthy LT; McClish D; Agovino P
    J Registry Manag; 2010; 37(4):141-7. PubMed ID: 21688743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Cancer-registry data in Latvia.
    Stengrevics A
    Lancet; 1997 Aug; 350(9076):523. PubMed ID: 9274613
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Childhood cancer registration in New Zealand: A registry collaboration to assess and improve data quality.
    Ballantine KR; Hanna S; Macfarlane S; Bradbeer P; Teague L; Hunter S; Cross S; Skeen J
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2018 Aug; 55():104-109. PubMed ID: 29902672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Factors associated with time to availability for cases reported to population-based cancer registries.
    Smith-Gagen J; Cress RD; Drake CM; Felter MC; Beaumont JJ
    Cancer Causes Control; 2005 May; 16(4):449-54. PubMed ID: 15953987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Measurement of the Inter-Rater Reliability Rate Is Mandatory for Improving the Quality of a Medical Database: Experience with the Paulista Lung Cancer Registry.
    Lauricella LL; Costa PB; Salati M; Pego-Fernandes PM; Terra RM
    J Am Coll Surg; 2018 Jun; 226(6):1128-1136. PubMed ID: 29551696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Completeness and accuracy of registration of ovarian cancer in the cancer registry of Norway.
    Tingulstad S; Halvorsen T; Norstein J; Hagen B; Skjeldestad FE
    Int J Cancer; 2002 Apr; 98(6):907-11. PubMed ID: 11948471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Electronic clinical laboratory reports as a source for ascertaining and confirming chromosomal anomalies reported to the New York State Congenital Malformations Registry.
    Tao Z; Wang Y; Dicesare DK; Chang HG; Steen PM; Cross PK; Druschel CM
    J Public Health Manag Pract; 2013; 19(2):E17-24. PubMed ID: 23358302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Identifying incident cancer cases in routinely collected hospital data: a retrospective validation study.
    Goldsbury DE; Weber MF; Canfell K; O'Connell DL
    BMC Res Notes; 2019 Oct; 12(1):674. PubMed ID: 31639061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Accuracy and completeness of the New Zealand Cancer Registry for staging of invasive breast cancer.
    Seneviratne S; Campbell I; Scott N; Shirley R; Peni T; Lawrenson R
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2014 Oct; 38(5):638-44. PubMed ID: 25037979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The validity of self-reported cancer in an Australian population study.
    Loh V; Harding J; Koshkina V; Barr E; Shaw J; Magliano D
    Aust N Z J Public Health; 2014 Feb; 38(1):35-8. PubMed ID: 24494943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Validity of self-reported cancers in a prospective cohort study in comparison with data from state cancer registries.
    Bergmann MM; Calle EE; Mervis CA; Miracle-McMahill HL; Thun MJ; Heath CW
    Am J Epidemiol; 1998 Mar; 147(6):556-62. PubMed ID: 9521182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.