128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22717858)
1. Comparison of data from the Norwegian Patient Register and the Cancer Registry of Norway.
Bakken IJ; Gystad SO; Christensen ØO; Huse UE; Larønningen S; Nygård J; Holmstrøm L; Johannesen TB; Møller B; Larsen IK
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2012 Jun; 132(11):1336-40. PubMed ID: 22717858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quality of data reported on abdominal aortic aneurysm repair--a comparison between a national vascular and a national administrative registry.
Haug ES; Romundstad P; Saether OD; Jørgenvåg R; Myhre HO
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg; 2005 Jun; 29(6):571-8. PubMed ID: 15878531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Is registration of multiple myeloma in the Norwegian Cancer Registry good enough?].
Aasbrenn M; Langmark F; Wisløff F
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2008 Dec; 128(23):2712-4. PubMed ID: 19079417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Data quality of surgery for carotid artery stenosis. Are the national vascular registries reliable?
Dahl T; Rudjord K; Altreuther M; Myhre HO
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg; 2006 Apr; 31(4):381-5. PubMed ID: 16387520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of cancer incidence in Norway and Arkhangelskaja Oblast in Russia.
Vaktskjold A; Lebedintseva J; Korotov D; Podjakova T; Tkatsjov A; Lund E
Alaska Med; 2007; 49(2 Suppl):99-104. PubMed ID: 17929616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Validation of data in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register and the Norwegian Patient Register: 5,134 primary total hip arthroplasties and revisions operated at a single hospital between 1987 and 2003.
Arthursson AJ; Furnes O; Espehaug B; Havelin LI; Söreide JA
Acta Orthop; 2005 Dec; 76(6):823-8. PubMed ID: 16470436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The incidence of hip fractures in Norway -accuracy of the national Norwegian patient registry.
Høiberg MP; Gram J; Hermann P; Brixen K; Haugeberg G
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2014 Nov; 15():372. PubMed ID: 25394865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Data quality at the Icelandic Cancer Registry: comparability, validity, timeliness and completeness.
Sigurdardottir LG; Jonasson JG; Stefansdottir S; Jonsdottir A; Olafsdottir GH; Olafsdottir EJ; Tryggvadottir L
Acta Oncol; 2012 Sep; 51(7):880-9. PubMed ID: 22974093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Can we rely on Norwegian surgery data? A quality control at central and local hospitals of the procedure codes used in the survey on organization of gastrointestinal cancer surgery].
Kindseth O; Ostensen H; Soreide O
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 1995 Aug; 115(20):2555-8. PubMed ID: 7676422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Use of combined search criteria improved validity of rare disease (craniopharyngioma) diagnosis in a national registry.
Nielsen EH; Lindholm J; Laurberg P
J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Oct; 64(10):1118-26. PubMed ID: 21463925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Validation of the multiple sclerosis diagnosis in the Norwegian Patient Registry.
Benjaminsen E; Myhr KM; Grytten N; Alstadhaug KB
Brain Behav; 2019 Nov; 9(11):e01422. PubMed ID: 31583850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Registration completeness in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.
Espehaug B; Furnes O; Havelin LI; Engesaeter LB; Vollset SE; Kindseth O
Acta Orthop; 2006 Feb; 77(1):49-56. PubMed ID: 16534702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Breast cancer surgery in Norway 1990-95 illustrated by data from SINTEF United].
Lundgren S; Jørgensen S; Kåresen R
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2001 Sep; 121(23):2688-93. PubMed ID: 11699375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Diagnosis versus code].
Hoddevik GH
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2005 Nov; 125(21):2973-4. PubMed ID: 16276384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Norwegian Hip Fracture Register: experiences after the first 2 years and 15,576 reported operations.
Gjertsen JE; Engesaeter LB; Furnes O; Havelin LI; Steindal K; Vinje T; Fevang JM
Acta Orthop; 2008 Oct; 79(5):583-93. PubMed ID: 18839363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Cancer survival analysis in Hamburg 1995-2003: assessing the data quality within a population-based registry.
Nennecke AL; Hentschel S; Reintjes R
Acta Oncol; 2009; 48(1):34-43. PubMed ID: 18607873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Head and neck cancer in Norway. A study of the quality of the Cancer Registry of Norway's data on head and neck cancer for the period 1953-1991.
Mork J; Thoresen S; Faye-Lund H; Langmark F; Glattre E
APMIS; 1995 May; 103(5):375-82. PubMed ID: 7654362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Record linkage of a large clinical practice patient cohort with the Cancer Registry Schleswig-Holstein].
Obi N; Waldmann A; Babaev V; Katalinic A
Gesundheitswesen; 2011 Jul; 73(7):452-8. PubMed ID: 20549597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Validity of registry data: agreement between cancer records in an end-stage kidney disease registry (voluntary reporting) and a cancer register (statutory reporting).
Webster AC; Supramaniam R; O'Connell DL; Chapman JR; Craig JC
Nephrology (Carlton); 2010 Jun; 15(4):491-501. PubMed ID: 20609104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
