Validity of patient-reported information: agreement rate between patient reports and registry data.

BMC Health Serv Res

Division of Health Services Research, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, 5-1-1, Tsukiji, Chuo-Ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.

Published: January 2025

Background: The accuracy of patient-reported clinical information, including cancer stage, is not well understood. This study aims to evaluate the agreement between patient-reported survey data and clinical information recorded in hospital-based cancer registries (HBCR).

Methods: A total of 730 patients from 166 hospitals in Japan were randomly selected and informed that their survey responses would be validated against HBCR data. Demographic details, including age, sex, cancer stage, and cancer site, were recorded and compared with clinical data from the HBCR. Agreement rates between patients' self-reported demographic and clinical data and the corresponding HBCR records were analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with accurate reporting of cancer stage information.

Results: Agreement rates for age, sex, and cancer site were 99.4%, 99.8%, and over 90% across all cancer sites, respectively. The agreement rate for cancer stage reporting was 49.9%. Patients with stage IV cancer had the highest agreement rate at 68.4%. Patients under 75 years of age and those with specific cancer types demonstrated higher odds of reporting data consistent with HBCR records.

Conclusions: For cancer stage data, relying on more credible sources, such as cancer registries, is recommended over patient-reported information to ensure accuracy.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11783825PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-12324-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cancer stage
20
agreement rate
12
cancer
12
cancer registries
8
age sex
8
sex cancer
8
stage cancer
8
cancer site
8
clinical data
8
agreement rates
8

Similar Publications

Objectives: To assess the prognostic impact of adequate lymphadenectomy and determine the optimal nodal assessment for different clinical stages of lung cancer.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1214 patients with clinical stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer who had preoperative PET/CT and curative surgery (2006-2017). Patients were categorized based on whether they had adequate [R0] or inadequate lymphadenectomy [R(un)].

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!