Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 164

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparison of charlson and elixhauser comorbidity measures to predict colorectal cancer survival using administrative health data

Open access
Lieffers, Jessica R., Baracos, Vickie E., Winget, Marcy, Fassbender, Konrad·2011·Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cancer survival is related to features of the primary malignancy and concurrent presence of nonmalignant diseases (comorbidities), including weight‐related conditions (obesity, weight loss). The Charlson and Elixhauser methods are 2 well‐known methods that take comorbidities into account when explaining survival. They differ in both the number and categorization of comorbidities. METHODS: Cancer, comorbidity, and survival data were acquired from inpatient administrative hospital records in 574 colorectal cancer patients. Robust Poisson regression was used to analyze 2‐ and 3‐year survival according to cancer features and comorbidities classified by the Charlson and Elixhauser methods. Data for weight‐related conditions (body mass index, weight loss) and performance status were acquired upon a new patient visit to the regional cancer center. Discrimination was assessed with the concordance (c) statistic. RESULTS: A base model (age, sex, stage) had excellent discrimination (c‐statistic, 0.824 [2‐year survival] and 0.827 [3‐year survival]). The addition of Charlson comorbidities did not outperform the base model (c‐statistic, 0.831 [2‐year survival] and 0.833 [3‐year survival]). Elixhauser comorbidities added higher discrimination compared with the base model, both in stage and overall (c‐statistic, 0.852 [2‐year survival] and 0.854 [3‐year survival]; P < .01). The greatest increase in the c‐statistic contributed by the addition of the Elixhauser comorbidities occurred in stage II patients (increased from 0.683 to 0.838). Overall, the Elixhauser comorbidities outperformed the Charlson comorbidities (P < .05). The use of self‐reported weight and performance status data significantly increased discrimination by the Elixhauser method in 2‐year but not 3‐year survival. CONCLUSIONS: The Elixhauser method is a superior comorbidity risk‐adjustment model for colorectal cancer survival prediction. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.25653

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 164

Metadata

Authors
Lieffers, J. R., Baracos, V. E., Winget, M., & Fassbender, K.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-12-22
Volume
117
Issue
9
Pages
1957-1965
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W2037583987
Cited by
164
References
4
FWCI
1.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison of charlson and elixhauser comorbidity measures to predict colorectal cancer survival using administrative health data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.25653
The paper
Lieffers, J. R., Baracos, V. E., Winget, M., & Fassbender, K. (2011). A comparison of charlson and elixhauser comorbidity measures to predict colorectal cancer survival using administrative health data. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25653

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.