197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23084081)
1. Determinants and interpretation of death certificate only proportions in the initial years of newly established cancer registries.
Brenner H; Jansen L
Eur J Cancer; 2013 Mar; 49(4):931-7. PubMed ID: 23084081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Index for evaluating completeness of registration in population-based cancer registries and estimation of registration rate at the Osaka Cancer Registry between 1966 and 1992 using this index].
Ajiki W; Tsukuma H; Oshima A
Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi; 1998 Oct; 45(10):1011-7. PubMed ID: 9893469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Death certificate only proportions should be age adjusted in studies comparing cancer survival across populations and over time.
Brenner H; Castro FA; Eberle A; Emrich K; Holleczek B; Katalinic A; Jansen L;
Eur J Cancer; 2016 Jan; 52():102-8. PubMed ID: 26682869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Implications from Under-reporting at Lifetime, Death Certificate Notifications and Trace-back on the Recorded Incidence of a "Newly" Established Population-based Cancer Registry.
Holleczek B; Brenner H
Methods Inf Med; 2016; 55(2):182-92. PubMed ID: 26678331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Restriction to period of interest improves informative value of death certificate only proportions in period analysis of cancer survival.
Brenner H; Jansen L
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Dec; 68(12):1432-9. PubMed ID: 25881488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Deriving valid population-based cancer survival estimates in the presence of nonnegligible proportions of cancers notified by death certificates only.
Brenner H; Holleczek B
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2011 Dec; 20(12):2480-6. PubMed ID: 21960691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Why did treatment rates for colorectal cancer in south east England fall between 1982 and 1988? The effect of case ascertainment and registration bias.
Pollock AM; Benster R; Vickers N
J Public Health Med; 1995 Dec; 17(4):419-28. PubMed ID: 8639341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Relationship of proportion of DCO cases in cancer registration to gastric cancer screening participation rate and proportion of all referred inpatients diagnosed with neoplasm].
Nagai Y; Koinuma N
Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi; 1993 Jul; 40(7):567-70. PubMed ID: 8369534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Interpreting international comparisons of cancer survival: the effects of incomplete registration and the presence of death certificate only cases on survival estimates.
Robinson D; Sankila R; Hakulinen T; Møller H
Eur J Cancer; 2007 Mar; 43(5):909-13. PubMed ID: 17300929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Does exclusion of cancers registered only from death-certificate information diminish socio-demographic disparities in recorded survival?
Tervonen HE; Roder D; Morrell S; You H; Currow DC
Cancer Epidemiol; 2017 Jun; 48():70-77. PubMed ID: 28419901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Limitations of the death certificate only index as a measure of incompleteness of cancer registration.
Brenner H
Br J Cancer; 1995 Aug; 72(2):506-10. PubMed ID: 7640240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Impact of using multiple causes of death codes to compute site-specific, death certificate-based cancer mortality statistics in the United States.
Fink AK; German RR; Heron M; Stewart SL; Johnson CJ; Finch JL; Yin D; Schaeffer PE;
Cancer Epidemiol; 2012 Feb; 36(1):22-8. PubMed ID: 21907006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A mixed linear model controlling for case underascertainment across multiple cancer registries estimated time trends in survival.
Dahm S; Bertz J; Barnes B; Kraywinkel K
J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 May; 97():111-121. PubMed ID: 29329676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Why are a quarter of all cancer deaths in south-east England registered by death certificate only? Factors related to death certificate only registrations in the Thames Cancer Registry between 1987 and 1989.
Pollock AM; Vickers N
Br J Cancer; 1995 Mar; 71(3):637-41. PubMed ID: 7880750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The impact on colorectal cancer survival of cases registered by 'death certificate only': implications for national survival rates.
Pollock AM; Vickers N
Br J Cancer; 1994 Dec; 70(6):1229-31. PubMed ID: 7981082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cancer Incidence in Older Adults in the United States: Characteristics, Specificity, and Completeness of the Data.
Weir HK; Sherman R; Yu M; Gershman S; Hofer BM; Wu M; Green D
J Registry Manag; 2020; 47(3):150-160. PubMed ID: 33584972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prophylactic Oophorectomy: Reducing the U.S. Death Rate from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. A Continuing Debate.
Piver MS
Oncologist; 1996; 1(5):326-330. PubMed ID: 10388011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reduction of population-based cancer survival estimates by trace back of death certificate notifications: an empirical illustration.
Holleczek B; Brenner H
Eur J Cancer; 2012 Apr; 48(6):797-804. PubMed ID: 21703847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Frequency and determinants of missing data in clinical and prognostic variables recently added to SEER.
Kim HM; Goodman M; Kim BI; Ward KC
J Registry Manag; 2011; 38(3):120-31. PubMed ID: 22223054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Reliability of recording uterine cancer in death certification in France and age-specific proportions of deaths from cervix and corpus uteri.
Rogel A; Belot A; Suzan F; Bossard N; Boussac M; Arveux P; Buémi A; Colonna M; Danzon A; Ganry O; Guizard AV; Grosclaude P; Velten M; Jougla E; Iwaz J; Estève J; Chérié-Challine L; Remontet L
Cancer Epidemiol; 2011 Jun; 35(3):243-9. PubMed ID: 21106450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
