1. Introduction and Overview. 2. Detecting Influential Observations and Outliers. 3. Detecting and Assessing Collinearity. 4. Applications and Remedies. 5. Research Issues and Directions for Extensions. Bibliography. Author Index. Subject Index.

Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity

25. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. By D. B. Rubin. ISBN 0 471 08705 X. Wiley, Chichester, 1987. 258 pp. £30.25.

Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys

The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States because of the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate every 3 years to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries; vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics; and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Data Base are presented for the most prevalent cancer types. Cancer-related and treatment-related short-term, long-term, and late health effects are also briefly described. More than 16.9 million Americans (8.1 million males and 8.8 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2019; this number is projected to reach more than 22.1 million by January 1, 2030 based on the growth and aging of the population alone. The 3 most prevalent cancers in 2019 are prostate (3,650,030), colon and rectum (776,120), and melanoma of the skin (684,470) among males, and breast (3,861,520), uterine corpus (807,860), and colon and rectum (768,650) among females. More than one-half (56%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and almost two-thirds (64%) are aged 65 years or older. People with a history of cancer have unique medical and psychosocial needs that require proactive assessment and management by follow-up care providers. Although there are growing numbers of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence-based resources are needed to optimize care.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/caac.21565

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019

The number of cancer survivors continues to increase due to the aging and growth of the population and improvements in early detection and treatment. In order for the public health community to better serve these survivors, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborated to estimate the number of current and future cancer survivors using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program registries. In addition, current treatment patterns for the most common cancer types are described based on information in the National Cancer Data Base and the SEER and SEER-Medicare linked databases; treatment-related side effects are also briefly described. Nearly 14.5 million Americans with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2014; by January 1, 2024, that number will increase to nearly 19 million. The 3 most common prevalent cancers among males are prostate cancer (43%), colorectal cancer (9%), and melanoma (8%), and those among females are cancers of the breast (41%), uterine corpus (8%), and colon and rectum (8%). The age distribution of survivors varies substantially by cancer type. For example, the majority of prostate cancer survivors (62%) are aged 70 years or older, whereas less than one-third (32%) of melanoma survivors are in this older age group. It is important for clinicians to understand the unique medical and psychosocial needs of cancer survivors and to proactively assess and manage these issues. There are a growing number of resources that can assist patients, caregivers, and health care providers in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship.

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014

Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

Abstract We previously described the hypotheses, outcomes, design, and analysis for E2C2, a pragmatic stepped-wedge trial to assess an intervention to improve symptom control in patients with cancer. Subsequent consideration of the design and cohort led to the addition of a second primary hypothesis. This article describes and presents the rationale for this second hypothesis. This addendum also details a revised analytic approach, necessitated by inconsistencies in the original analytic plan. The design, outcomes, and other aspects of the protocol remain unchanged. 

https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13063-022-06983-6

Pragmatic cluster randomized trial to evaluate effectiveness and implementation of EHR-facilitated collaborative symptom control in cancer (E2C2): addendum

This qualitative study sought to improve the understanding of patient experiences with patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools by examining perceptions of and attitudes toward PROs and expectations of data use after collection. Patients generally reported a good understanding of the need for PRO collection, both for research and clinical use. Many expected that results would be acted upon by the clinicians promptly. Thematic analyses identified the following patient perception topics: transparency, individualization to patient needs, timely response, different “identities” while accessing care locally compared with at a destination center, and preference for brief PROs. Overall, concerns expressed in this study suggest a need to educate stakeholders about the intent, process, and use of PROs. Furthermore, the design and implementation of PRO assessments into patient care should include patients as key end users. Abstract Objectives Although the literature provides guidance regarding patient-reported outcome (PRO) implementation barriers, patients’ perspectives are underreported. This study aimed to improve the understanding of patient experiences with PRO tools through examining perceptions of and attitudes toward PROs and expectations of data use after collection. Methods Ethnographic human-centered design approaches were used to conduct free-form interviews. Two case studies of existing PRO use in clinics also were examined. Unstructured thematic analyses were performed using notes taken during these interviews. Results Patients generally reported a good understanding of the need for PRO collection, both for research and clinical use. Many expected that results would be acted upon by the clinicians promptly. Thematic analyses identified the following patient perception topics: transparency, individualization to patient needs, timely response, different “identities” while accessing care locally compared with at a destination center, and preference for brief PROs. Conclusions Design and implementation of PRO assessments into patient care should include the patients as key end users. Transparency of the purpose for data collection is critical for broader patient adoption. Ensuring that only necessary and sufficient data are collected for clinical action, and associated research may help minimize burden and maximize patient participation.

Exploring the Patient Experience with Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Qualitative, Multistakeholder Study

Examination of the Measurement Equivalence of the Functional Assessment in Acute Care MCAT (FAMCAT) Mobility Item Bank Using Differential Item Functioning Analyses.

Running head: A Self-Report Lower-Extremity Lymphedema Screening Questionnaire in

Objective:To evaluate the comprehensiveness of primary care sports medicine fellowship websites and identify potential areas of improvement.Design:Cross-sectional analysis of fellowship program web...

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/23821205211028346

Andrea L. Cheville

Papers

Pragmatic cluster randomized trial to evaluate effectiveness and implementation of EHR-facilitated collaborative symptom control in cancer (E2C2): addendum

Exploring the Patient Experience with Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Qualitative, Multistakeholder Study

Examination of the Measurement Equivalence of the Functional Assessment in Acute Care MCAT (FAMCAT) Mobility Item Bank Using Differential Item Functioning Analyses.

Running head: A Self-Report Lower-Extremity Lymphedema Screening Questionnaire in

Comprehensive Evaluation of Primary Care Sports Medicine Fellowship Websites