DBCG hypo trial validation of radiotherapy parameters from a national data bank versus manual reporting

Carsten Brink, Ebbe L Lorenzen, Simon Long Krogh, Jonas Westberg, Martin Berg, Ingelise Jensen, Mette Skovhus Thomsen, Esben Svitzer Yates, Birgitte Vrou Offersen

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKonferenceartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

INTRODUCTION: The current study evaluates the data quality achievable using a national data bank for reporting radiotherapy parameters relative to the classical manual reporting method of selected parameters.

METHODS: The data comparison is based on 1522 Danish patients of the DBCG hypo trial with data stored in the Danish national radiotherapy data bank. In line with standard DBCG trial practice selected parameters were also reported manually to the DBCG database. Categorical variables are compared using contingency tables, and comparison of continuous parameters is presented in scatter plots.

RESULTS: For categorical variables 25 differences between the data bank and manual values were located. Of these 23 were related to mistakes in the manual reported value whilst the remaining two were a wrong classification in the data bank. The wrong classification in the data bank was related to lack of dose information, since the two patients had been treated with an electron boost based on a manual calculation, thus data was not exported to the data bank, and this was not detected prior to comparison with the manual data. For a few database fields in the manual data an ambiguity of the parameter definition of the specific field is seen in the data. This was not the case for the data bank, which extract all data consistently.

CONCLUSIONS: In terms of data quality the data bank is superior to manually reported values. However, there is a need to allocate resources for checking the validity of the available data as well as ensuring that all relevant data is present. The data bank contains more detailed information, and thus facilitates research related to the actual dose distribution in the patients.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftActa Oncologica
Vol/bind57
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)107-112
ISSN0284-186X
DOI
StatusUdgivet - jan. 2018
Begivenhed16th Acta Oncologica Symposium - Aarhus , Danmark
Varighed: 18. jan. 201819. jan. 2018

Konference

Konference16th Acta Oncologica Symposium
LandDanmark
ByAarhus
Periode18/01/201819/01/2018

Fingeraftryk

Databases
Research Design
Electrons
Research

Citer dette

Brink, C., Lorenzen, E. L., Krogh, S. L., Westberg, J., Berg, M., Jensen, I., ... Offersen, B. V. (2018). DBCG hypo trial validation of radiotherapy parameters from a national data bank versus manual reporting. Acta Oncologica, 57(1), 107-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2017.1406140
Brink, Carsten ; Lorenzen, Ebbe L ; Krogh, Simon Long ; Westberg, Jonas ; Berg, Martin ; Jensen, Ingelise ; Thomsen, Mette Skovhus ; Yates, Esben Svitzer ; Offersen, Birgitte Vrou. / DBCG hypo trial validation of radiotherapy parameters from a national data bank versus manual reporting. I: Acta Oncologica. 2018 ; Bind 57, Nr. 1. s. 107-112.
@inproceedings{d7199ce6168447d9b97a1392a8f455fc,
title = "DBCG hypo trial validation of radiotherapy parameters from a national data bank versus manual reporting",
abstract = "INTRODUCTION: The current study evaluates the data quality achievable using a national data bank for reporting radiotherapy parameters relative to the classical manual reporting method of selected parameters.METHODS: The data comparison is based on 1522 Danish patients of the DBCG hypo trial with data stored in the Danish national radiotherapy data bank. In line with standard DBCG trial practice selected parameters were also reported manually to the DBCG database. Categorical variables are compared using contingency tables, and comparison of continuous parameters is presented in scatter plots.RESULTS: For categorical variables 25 differences between the data bank and manual values were located. Of these 23 were related to mistakes in the manual reported value whilst the remaining two were a wrong classification in the data bank. The wrong classification in the data bank was related to lack of dose information, since the two patients had been treated with an electron boost based on a manual calculation, thus data was not exported to the data bank, and this was not detected prior to comparison with the manual data. For a few database fields in the manual data an ambiguity of the parameter definition of the specific field is seen in the data. This was not the case for the data bank, which extract all data consistently.CONCLUSIONS: In terms of data quality the data bank is superior to manually reported values. However, there is a need to allocate resources for checking the validity of the available data as well as ensuring that all relevant data is present. The data bank contains more detailed information, and thus facilitates research related to the actual dose distribution in the patients.",
keywords = "Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy, Databases, Factual, Denmark, Dose Fractionation, Radiation, Female, Humans, Quality Control, Radiotherapy, Adjuvant, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic",
author = "Carsten Brink and Lorenzen, {Ebbe L} and Krogh, {Simon Long} and Jonas Westberg and Martin Berg and Ingelise Jensen and Thomsen, {Mette Skovhus} and Yates, {Esben Svitzer} and Offersen, {Birgitte Vrou}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1080/0284186X.2017.1406140",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "107--112",
journal = "Acta Oncologica",
issn = "0284-186X",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",

}

Brink, C, Lorenzen, EL, Krogh, SL, Westberg, J, Berg, M, Jensen, I, Thomsen, MS, Yates, ES & Offersen, BV 2018, 'DBCG hypo trial validation of radiotherapy parameters from a national data bank versus manual reporting', Acta Oncologica, bind 57, nr. 1, s. 107-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2017.1406140

DBCG hypo trial validation of radiotherapy parameters from a national data bank versus manual reporting. / Brink, Carsten; Lorenzen, Ebbe L; Krogh, Simon Long; Westberg, Jonas; Berg, Martin; Jensen, Ingelise; Thomsen, Mette Skovhus; Yates, Esben Svitzer; Offersen, Birgitte Vrou.

I: Acta Oncologica, Bind 57, Nr. 1, 01.2018, s. 107-112.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKonferenceartikelForskningpeer review

TY - GEN

T1 - DBCG hypo trial validation of radiotherapy parameters from a national data bank versus manual reporting

AU - Brink, Carsten

AU - Lorenzen, Ebbe L

AU - Krogh, Simon Long

AU - Westberg, Jonas

AU - Berg, Martin

AU - Jensen, Ingelise

AU - Thomsen, Mette Skovhus

AU - Yates, Esben Svitzer

AU - Offersen, Birgitte Vrou

PY - 2018/1

Y1 - 2018/1

N2 - INTRODUCTION: The current study evaluates the data quality achievable using a national data bank for reporting radiotherapy parameters relative to the classical manual reporting method of selected parameters.METHODS: The data comparison is based on 1522 Danish patients of the DBCG hypo trial with data stored in the Danish national radiotherapy data bank. In line with standard DBCG trial practice selected parameters were also reported manually to the DBCG database. Categorical variables are compared using contingency tables, and comparison of continuous parameters is presented in scatter plots.RESULTS: For categorical variables 25 differences between the data bank and manual values were located. Of these 23 were related to mistakes in the manual reported value whilst the remaining two were a wrong classification in the data bank. The wrong classification in the data bank was related to lack of dose information, since the two patients had been treated with an electron boost based on a manual calculation, thus data was not exported to the data bank, and this was not detected prior to comparison with the manual data. For a few database fields in the manual data an ambiguity of the parameter definition of the specific field is seen in the data. This was not the case for the data bank, which extract all data consistently.CONCLUSIONS: In terms of data quality the data bank is superior to manually reported values. However, there is a need to allocate resources for checking the validity of the available data as well as ensuring that all relevant data is present. The data bank contains more detailed information, and thus facilitates research related to the actual dose distribution in the patients.

AB - INTRODUCTION: The current study evaluates the data quality achievable using a national data bank for reporting radiotherapy parameters relative to the classical manual reporting method of selected parameters.METHODS: The data comparison is based on 1522 Danish patients of the DBCG hypo trial with data stored in the Danish national radiotherapy data bank. In line with standard DBCG trial practice selected parameters were also reported manually to the DBCG database. Categorical variables are compared using contingency tables, and comparison of continuous parameters is presented in scatter plots.RESULTS: For categorical variables 25 differences between the data bank and manual values were located. Of these 23 were related to mistakes in the manual reported value whilst the remaining two were a wrong classification in the data bank. The wrong classification in the data bank was related to lack of dose information, since the two patients had been treated with an electron boost based on a manual calculation, thus data was not exported to the data bank, and this was not detected prior to comparison with the manual data. For a few database fields in the manual data an ambiguity of the parameter definition of the specific field is seen in the data. This was not the case for the data bank, which extract all data consistently.CONCLUSIONS: In terms of data quality the data bank is superior to manually reported values. However, there is a need to allocate resources for checking the validity of the available data as well as ensuring that all relevant data is present. The data bank contains more detailed information, and thus facilitates research related to the actual dose distribution in the patients.

KW - Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy

KW - Databases, Factual

KW - Denmark

KW - Dose Fractionation, Radiation

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Quality Control

KW - Radiotherapy, Adjuvant

KW - Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

U2 - 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1406140

DO - 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1406140

M3 - Conference article

VL - 57

SP - 107

EP - 112

JO - Acta Oncologica

JF - Acta Oncologica

SN - 0284-186X

IS - 1

ER -