To evaluate the completeness of information for research and quality assessment through a linkage between cancer registry data and electronic health record (EHR) data refined by ASCO's health technology platform CancerLinQ.
A probabilistic data linkage between Iowa Cancer Registry (ICR) and an Iowa oncology clinic through CancerLinQ data was conducted for cases diagnosed between 2009 and 2018. Demographic, cancer, and treatment variables were compared between data sources for the same patients, all of whom were diagnosed with one primary cancer. Treatment data and compliance with quality measures were compared among those with breast or prostate cancer; SEER-Medicare data served as a comparison. Variables captured only in CancerLinQ data (smoking, pain, and height/weight) were evaluated for completeness.
There were 6,175 patients whose data were linked between ICR and CancerLinQ data sets. Of those, 4,291 (70%) were diagnosed with one primary cancer and were included in analyses. Demographic variables were comparable between data sets. Proportions of people receiving hormone therapy (30% v 26%, P < .0001) or immunotherapy (22% v 12%, P < .0001) were significantly higher in CancerLinQ data compared with ICR data. ICR data contained more complete TNM stage, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing, and Gleason score information. Compliance with quality measures was generally highest in SEER-Medicare data followed by the combined ICR-CancerLinQ data. CancerLinQ data contained smoking, pain, and height/weight information within one month of diagnosis for 88%, 52%, and 76% of patients, respectively.
Linking CancerLinQ EHR data with cancer registry data led to more complete data for each source respectively, as registry data provides definitive diagnosis and more complete stage information and laboratory results, whereas EHR data provide more detailed treatment data and additional variables not captured by registries.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
1
2%
Other
3
7%
Unknown
29
69%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2022.
All research outputs
#8,543,833
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
#399
of 653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,557
of 446,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
#18
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,498 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
