Apples and pears? A comparison of two sources of national lung cancer audit data in England

Khakwani, Aamir and Jack, Ruth H. and Vernon, Sally and Dickinson, Rosie and Wood, Nastasha and Harden, Susan and Beckett, Paul and Woolhouse, Ian and Hubbard, Richard B. (2017) Apples and pears? A comparison of two sources of national lung cancer audit data in England. ERJ Open Research, 3 (3). pp. 1-8. ISSN 2312-0541

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Available under Licence Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.
Download (421kB) | Preview

Abstract

In 2014, the method of data collection from NHS trusts in England for the National Lung Cancer Audit (NLCA) was changed from a bespoke dataset called LUCADA (Lung Cancer Data). Under the new contract, data are submitted via the Cancer Outcome and Service Dataset (COSD) system and linked additional cancer registry datasets. In 2014, trusts were given opportunity to submit LUCADA data as well as registry data. 132 NHS trusts submitted LUCADA data, and all 151 trusts submitted COSD data. This transitional year therefore provided the opportunity to compare both datasets for data completeness and reliability.

We linked the two datasets at the patient level to assess the completeness of key patient and treatment variables. We also assessed the interdata agreement of these variables using Cohen’s kappa statistic, κ.

We identified 26 001 patients in both datasets. Overall, the recording of sex, age, performance status and stage had more than 90% agreement between datasets, but there were more patients with missing performance status in the registry dataset. Although levels of agreement for surgery, chemotherapy and external-beam radiotherapy were high between datasets, the new COSD system identified more instances of active treatment.

There seems to be a high agreement of data between the datasets, and the findings suggest that the registry dataset coupled with COSD provides a richer dataset than LUCADA. However, it lagged behind LUCADA in performance status recording, which needs to improve over time.

Item Type: Article
Schools/Departments: University of Nottingham, UK > Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Medicine > Division of Epidemiology and Public Health
Identification Number: 10.1183/23120541.00003-2017
Depositing User: Claringburn, Tara
Date Deposited: 27 Jul 2017 09:48
Last Modified: 12 Oct 2017 23:09
URI: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/id/eprint/44422

Actions (Archive Staff Only)

Edit View Edit View