Evaluating the Educational Value of Cancer Registries — a Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis

Journal of Cancer Education - 2023
James Lin1,2, Hugo C. Temperley3,4, Kirsten Larkins1,5, Caitlin Waters3, Kit Loong Chong1,2, Jack Maida1,2, David Proud1,2, Adele Burgess1,2, Alexander Heriot1,5, Philip Smart1,2, Helen Mohan1,2
1Melbourne Medical School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
2Department of Colorectal Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia
3Department of Surgery, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Perth, Australia
4Department of Cancer Surgery, St. John of God Midland Hospital, Perth, Australia
5Department of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia

Tóm tắt

Cancer registries encompass a broad array of functions that underpin cancer control efforts. Despite education being fundamental to improving patient outcomes, little is known regarding the educational value of cancer registries. This review will evaluate the educational value of cancer registries for key stakeholders as reported within published literature and identify opportunities for enhancing their educational value. Four databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science) were searched using a predefined search strategy in keeping with the PRISMA statement. Data was extracted and synthesised in narrative format. Themes and frequency of discussion of educational content were explored using thematic content analysis. From 952 titles, ten eligible studies were identified, highlighting six stakeholder groups. Educational outcomes were identified relating to clinicians (6/10), researchers (5/10), patients (4/10), public health organisations (3/10), medical students (1/10) and the public (1/10). Cancer registries were found to educationally benefit key stakeholders despite educational value not being a key focus of any study. Deliberate efforts to harness the educational value of cancer registries should be considered to enable data-driven quality improvement, with the vast amount of data promising ample educational benefit.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A et al (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71(3):209–249

White MC, Babcock F, Hayes NS, Mariotto AB, Wong FL, Kohler BA, Weir HK (2017) The history and use of cancer registry data by public health cancer control programs in the United States. Cancer 123(Suppl 24):4969–4976. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30905

What is a Cancer Registry?: National Cancer Institute. https://seer.cancer.gov/registries/cancer_registry/index.html. Accessed 3 Jul 2022

Armstrong BK (1992) The role of the cancer registry in cancer control. Cancer Causes Control 3(6):569–579

Platz EA (2017) Reducing cancer burden in the population: an overview of epidemiologic evidence to support policies, systems, and environmental changes. Epidemiol Rev 39(1):1–10

Pop B, Fetica B, Blaga ML, Trifa AP, Achimas-Cadariu P, Vlad CI et al (2019) The role of medical registries, potential applications and limitations. Med Pharm Rep 92(1):7–14

Coleman MP, Forman D, Bryant H, Butler J, Rachet B, Maringe C et al (2011) Cancer survival in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the UK, 1995-2007 (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): an analysis of population-based cancer registry data. Lancet 377(9760):127–138

Das A (2009) Cancer registry databases: an overview of techniques of statistical analysis and impact on cancer epidemiology. Methods Mol Biol 471:31–49

Parkin DM, Bray F (2009) Evaluation of data quality in the cancer registry: principles and methods Part II. Completeness. Eur J Cancer 45(5):756–764

Bray F, Parkin DM (2009) Evaluation of data quality in the cancer registry: principles and methods. Part I: comparability, validity and timeliness. Eur J Cancer 45(5):747–755

McLaughlin RH, Clarke CA, Crawley LM, Glaser SL (2010) Are cancer registries unconstitutional? Soc Sci Med 70(9):1295–1300

Ingelfinger JR, Drazen JM (2004) Registry research and medical privacy. N Engl J Med 350(14):1452–1453

State Government of Victoria (2014) Improving Cancer Outcomes Act. Updated October 1, 2016. https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/d02c56bb-ecc8-31be-b7d9-6ac1b7cdbb12_14-78aa002%20authorised.pdf. Accessed 28 Jun 2022

Cancer Australia AG. Improving Cancer Data 2022. https://www.canceraustralia.gov.au/research/data-and-statistics/cancer-data/improving-cancer-data. Accessed 11 Aug 2022

Thomas DB (2002) Alternatives to a national system of population-based state cancer registries. Am J Public Health 92(7):1064–1066

Wormald JS, Oberai T, Branford-White H, Johnson LJ (2020) Design and establishment of a cancer registry: a literature review. ANZ J Surg 90(7-8):1277–1282

Parkin DM (2006) The evolution of the population-based cancer registry. Nat Rev Cancer 6(8):603–612

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj 372:n71

Sullivan GM (2011) Deconstructing quality in education research. J Grad Med Educ 3(2):121–124

Cook DA, Reed DA (2015) Appraising the quality of medical education research methods: the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education. Acad Med 90(8):1067–1076

Kiger ME, Varpio L (2020) Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Med Teach 42(8):846–854

Jiagge E, Bensenhaver JM, Oppong JK, Awuah B, Newman LA (2015) Global surgical oncology disease burden: addressing disparities via global surgery initiatives: the University of Michigan International Breast Cancer Registry. Ann Surg Oncol 22(3):734–740

Chen AM, Kupelian PA, Wang PC, Steinberg ML (2018) Development of a radiation oncology-specific prospective data registry for research and quality improvement: a clinical workflow-based solution. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2:1–9

Auffenberg GB, Ghani KR, Ramani S, Usoro E, Denton B, Rogers C et al (2019) askMUSIC: Leveraging a clinical registry to develop a new machine learning model to inform patients of prostate cancer treatments chosen by similar men. Eur Urol 75(6):901–907

Joishy SK, Driscol JC (1989) The ailments of cancer registries: a proposal for remedial education. J Cancer Educ 4(1):17–31

Struth D (2017) Oncology Qualified Clinical Data Registry: a patient-centered, symptom-focused framework to guide quality improvement. Clin J Oncol Nurs 21(6):755–757

Burton RC (2002) Cancer control in Australia: into the 21(st) Century. Jpn J Clin Oncol 32(Suppl):S3–S9

MacCallum C, Skandarajah A, Gibbs P, Hayes I (2018) The value of clinical colorectal cancer registries in colorectal cancer research: a systematic review. JAMA Surg 153(9):841–849

Meiser B, Monnik M, Austin R, Nichols C, Cops E, Salmon L et al (2022) Stakeholder attitudes towards establishing a national genomics registry of inherited cancer predisposition: a qualitative study. J Community Genet 13(1):59–73

Rothenmund H, Singh H, Candas B, Chodirker BN, Serfas K, Aronson M et al (2013) Hereditary colorectal cancer registries in Canada: report from the Colorectal Cancer Association of Canada consensus meeting; Montreal, Quebec; October 28, 2011. Curr Oncol 20(5):273–278

Yardley S, Dornan T (2012) Kirkpatrick's levels and education 'evidence'. Med Educ 46(1):97–106

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Journal of Cancer Education

Thông tin tác giả