The incidence of breast cancer in the General Practice Research Database compared with national cancer registration data
Open accessAbstract
Breast cancer incidence rates in the UK from 1990 to 1996 among women aged 35-69 estimated from the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) were closely similar to those reported by the Office for National Statistics from cancer registration data (ONS). The GPRD is a valuable and up-to-date resource for further study of the incidence of breast cancer in the UK as well as changes in cancer treatment and their relation to survival trends.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Other researchers compared distributions of data values between practices or with national rates, or looked at agreement between related elements to assess plausibility.
“Other researchers compared distributions of data values between practices50 101 or with national rates,102 103 or looked at agreement between related elements.38 73”
From Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research (2013) · cites this paper as [102]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Weiskopf, N. G., & Weng, C. (2013) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000681 · Cited by 1,216 · see citing works
Long-Term Metformin Use Is Associated With Decreased Risk of Breast Cancer
Bodmer, M., Meier, C., Krähenbühl, S., Jick, S. S., & Meier, C. R. (2010) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc09-1791 · Cited by 466 · see citing works
Systematic review of scope and quality of electronic patient record data in primary care
Thiru, K., Hassey, A., & Sullivan, F. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7398.1070 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kaye, J. A., Derby, L. E., Melero-Montes, M. D. M., Quinn, M., & Jick, H.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Boston University (US)
- Office for National Statistics (GB)
- Venue
- British Journal of Cancer
- Published
- 2000-12
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1556-1558
- ISSN
- 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-1827
- PMC
- PMC2363417
- OpenAlex
- W1491455614
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- British Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Bristol-Myers Squibb
- AstraZeneca
- Novartis Farmacéutica
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Breast Lesions and Carcinomas
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
- Keywords
- breast cancer, cancer incidence, Clinical Practice Research Datalink, cancer registry data, cancer survival trends, cancer treatment trends
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Breast Neoplasms, Family Practice, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Middle Aged, Registries, Incidence, Databases, Factual
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
