Download Free Validity Of California Cancer Registry Data For Measuring The Quality Of Breast Cancer Care Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Validity Of California Cancer Registry Data For Measuring The Quality Of Breast Cancer Care and write the review.

This User’s Guide is intended to support the design, implementation, analysis, interpretation, and quality evaluation of registries created to increase understanding of patient outcomes. For the purposes of this guide, a patient registry is an organized system that uses observational study methods to collect uniform data (clinical and other) to evaluate specified outcomes for a population defined by a particular disease, condition, or exposure, and that serves one or more predetermined scientific, clinical, or policy purposes. A registry database is a file (or files) derived from the registry. Although registries can serve many purposes, this guide focuses on registries created for one or more of the following purposes: to describe the natural history of disease, to determine clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of health care products and services, to measure or monitor safety and harm, and/or to measure quality of care. Registries are classified according to how their populations are defined. For example, product registries include patients who have been exposed to biopharmaceutical products or medical devices. Health services registries consist of patients who have had a common procedure, clinical encounter, or hospitalization. Disease or condition registries are defined by patients having the same diagnosis, such as cystic fibrosis or heart failure. The User’s Guide was created by researchers affiliated with AHRQ’s Effective Health Care Program, particularly those who participated in AHRQ’s DEcIDE (Developing Evidence to Inform Decisions About Effectiveness) program. Chapters were subject to multiple internal and external independent reviews.
Cancer screening is a prominent strategy in cancer control in the United States, yet the ability to correctly interpret cancer screening data eludes many researchers, clinicians, and policy makers. This open access primer rectifies that situation by teaching readers, in simple language and with straightforward examples, why and how the population-level cancer burden changes when screening is implemented, and how we assess whether that change is of benefit. This book provides an in-depth look at the many aspects of cancer screening and its assessment, including screening phenomena, performance measures, population-level outcomes, research designs, and other important and timely topics. Concise, accessible, and focused, Assessment of Cancer Screening: A Primer is best suited to those with education or experience in clinical research or public health in the United States - no previous knowledge of cancer screening assessment is necessary. This is the first text dedicated to cancer screening theory and methodology to be published in 20 years.
Shortly after 1998, leading members of Georgia's government, medical community, and public-spirited citizenry began considering ways in which some of Georgia's almost $5 billion, 25-year settlement from the tobacco industry's Master Settlement Agreement with the 50 states could be used to benefit Georgia residents. Given tobacco's role in causing cancer, they decided to create an entity and program with the mission of making Georgia a national leader in cancer prevention, treatment, and research. This new entity-called the Georgia Cancer Coalition, Inc. (GCC)-and the state of Georgia subsequently began implementing a far-reaching state cancer initiative that includes five strategic goals: (1) preventing cancer and detecting existing cancers earlier; (2) improving access to quality care for all state residents with cancer; (3) saving more lives in the future; (4) training future cancer researchers and caregivers; and (5) turning the eradication of cancer into economic growth for Georgia. Assessing the Quality of Cancer Care identifies a set of measures that could be used to gauge Georgia's progress in improving the quality of its cancer services and in reducing cancer-related morbidity and mortality.
An ideal health care system relies on efficiently generating timely, accurate evidence to deliver on its promise of diminishing the divide between clinical practice and research. There are growing indications, however, that the current health care system and the clinical research that guides medical decisions in the United States falls far short of this vision. The process of generating medical evidence through clinical trials in the United States is expensive and lengthy, includes a number of regulatory hurdles, and is based on a limited infrastructure. The link between clinical research and medical progress is also frequently misunderstood or unsupported by both patients and providers. The focus of clinical research changes as diseases emerge and new treatments create cures for old conditions. As diseases evolve, the ultimate goal remains to speed new and improved medical treatments to patients throughout the world. To keep pace with rapidly changing health care demands, clinical research resources need to be organized and on hand to address the numerous health care questions that continually emerge. Improving the overall capacity of the clinical research enterprise will depend on ensuring that there is an adequate infrastructure in place to support the investigators who conduct research, the patients with real diseases who volunteer to participate in experimental research, and the institutions that organize and carry out the trials. To address these issues and better understand the current state of clinical research in the United States, the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation held a 2-day workshop entitled Transforming Clinical Research in the United States. The workshop, summarized in this volume, laid the foundation for a broader initiative of the Forum addressing different aspects of clinical research. Future Forum plans include further examining regulatory, administrative, and structural barriers to the effective conduct of clinical research; developing a vision for a stable, continuously funded clinical research infrastructure in the United States; and considering strategies and collaborative activities to facilitate more robust public engagement in the clinical research enterprise.
In the late 1980s, the National Cancer Institute initiated an investigation of cancer risks in populations near 52 commercial nuclear power plants and 10 Department of Energy nuclear facilities (including research and nuclear weapons production facilities and one reprocessing plant) in the United States. The results of the NCI investigation were used a primary resource for communicating with the public about the cancer risks near the nuclear facilities. However, this study is now over 20 years old. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requested that the National Academy of Sciences provide an updated assessment of cancer risks in populations near USNRC-licensed nuclear facilities that utilize or process uranium for the production of electricity. Analysis of Cancer Risks in Populations near Nuclear Facilities: Phase 1 focuses on identifying scientifically sound approaches for carrying out an assessment of cancer risks associated with living near a nuclear facility, judgments about the strengths and weaknesses of various statistical power, ability to assess potential confounding factors, possible biases, and required effort. The results from this Phase 1 study will be used to inform the design of cancer risk assessment, which will be carried out in Phase 2. This report is beneficial for the general public, communities near nuclear facilities, stakeholders, healthcare providers, policy makers, state and local officials, community leaders, and the media.
This open access book provides a valuable resource for hospitals, institutions, and health authorities worldwide in their plans to set up and develop comprehensive cancer care centers. The development and implementation of a comprehensive cancer program allows for a systematic approach to evidence-based strategies of prevention, early detection, diagnosis, treatment, and palliation. Comprehensive cancer programs also provide a nexus for the running of clinical trials and implementation of novel cancer therapies with the overall aim of optimizing comprehensive and holistic care of cancer patients and providing them with the best opportunity to improve quality of life and overall survival. This book's self-contained chapter format aims to reinforce the critical importance of comprehensive cancer care centers while providing a practical guide for the essential components needed to achieve them, such as operational considerations, guidelines for best clinical inpatient and outpatient care, and research and quality management structures. Intended to be wide-ranging and applicable at a global level for both high and low income countries, this book is also instructive for regions with limited resources. The Comprehensive Cancer Center: Development, Integration, and Implementation is an essential resource for oncology physicians including hematologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, and oncology nurses as well as hospitals, health departments, university authorities, governments and legislators.
Shortly after 1998, leading members of Georgia's government, medical community, and public-spirited citizenry began considering ways in which some of Georgia's almost $5 billion, 25-year settlement from the tobacco industry's Master Settlement Agreement with the 50 states could be used to benefit Georgia residents. Given tobacco's role in causing cancer, they decided to create an entity and program with the mission of making Georgia a national leader in cancer prevention, treatment, and research. This new entity-called the Georgia Cancer Coalition, Inc. (GCC)-and the state of Georgia subsequently began implementing a far-reaching state cancer initiative that includes five strategic goals: (1) preventing cancer and detecting existing cancers earlier; (2) improving access to quality care for all state residents with cancer; (3) saving more lives in the future; (4) training future cancer researchers and caregivers; and (5) turning the eradication of cancer into economic growth for Georgia. Assessing the Quality of Cancer Care identifies a set of measures that could be used to gauge Georgia's progress in improving the quality of its cancer services and in reducing cancer-related morbidity and mortality.