Skip Standard Navigation Links
CDC Home
Safer, Healthier People
CDC HomeCDC SearchHealth Topics A-Z
   
  WONDER Home FAQ Help Contact Us Search  
 

National Program of Cancer Registries
Public Information Data

Supporting Technical Reference Material

Registry Eligibility Criteria

Cancer incidence data included in this report are from statewide or metropolitan area cancer registries that have high-quality cancer incidence data for 2002 as demonstrated by meeting the following data quality criteria for all cancer sites combined:

  • Case ascertainment is 90% or more complete. The registry data include at least 90% of the expected, unduplicated cases where the expected cases are estimated by using methods developed by NAACCR.17,18,21,36 Because some cancer patients receive diagnostic or treatment services at more than one reporting facility, cancer registries perform a procedure known as "unduplication" to ensure that each cancer case is counted only once.
  • No more than 5% of cases are ascertained solely on the basis of a death certificate. The proportion of cases ascertained solely on the basis of a death certificate, with no other information on the case available after the registry has completed a routine procedure known as "death clearance and followback," is another measure of the completeness of case ascertainment.
  • No more than 3% of cases are missing information on sex.
  • No more than 3% of cases are missing information on age.
  • No more than 5% of cases are missing information on race.
  • At least 97% of the registry's records passed a set of single-field and interfield computerized edits. Computerized edits are computer programs that test the validity and logic of data components. For example, if
    (a) a patient received a diagnosis of cancer in 1999,
    (b) the patient's age was reported as 80 years, and
    (c) the patient's year of birth was reported as 1942, a computerized edit could, without human intervention, identify these components as incompatible.
    The computerized edits applied to the data in this report were designed by the SEER Program for use by SEER registries. During the 1990s, these edits were expanded and incorporated into NAACCR standards (http://www.naaccr.org) and into the EDITS software designed and maintained by CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/edits/edits.htm).

Appendix I, Table I.1, shows state and metropolitan area-specific measures for the data quality criteria used to determine which registries' data were eligible for inclusion in this report.

Source:   U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 2002 Incidence and Mortality. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute; 2005.
(Page 7)


Appendix I Table I.1
Table I.1: Achievement of Selected Data Quality Criteria* by State and SEER
Metropolitan Area Cancer Registries, 2002

Only data from the shaded states and metropolitan areas are included in 
 United States Cancer Statistics: 2002 Incidence and Mortality.**

% Case % Passing % % Missing % Missing % Missing Cancer Registry Ascertainment*** Edits+ DCOs^ Sex Race Age
Alabama >=95 100.0 2.1 0.00 0.43 0.00 Alaska >=95 100.0 0.3 0.00 1.39 0.00 Arizona 90-94 100.0 2.0 0.00 1.57 0.02 Arkansas <90 99.9 0.1 0.02 0.92 0.00 California >=95 100.0 1.2 0.01 1.89 0.03 Greater Bay# >=95 100.0 1.1 0.02 1.86 0.02 Los Angeles >=95 100.0 0.8 0.01 2.29 0.03 Colorado >=95 100.0 2.8 0.00 2.76 0.05 Connecticut >=95 100.0 1.4 0.02 0.87 0.00 Delaware 90-94 100.0 1.2 0.00 1.35 0.00 D.C. 90-94 99.5 3.1 0.22 1.74 0.04 Florida >=95 100.0 2.9 0.02 0.56 0.00 Georgia >=95 100.0 2.3 0.00 0.59 0.00 Atlanta >=95 100.0 1.2 0.00 0.62 0.00 Hawaii >=95 100.0 0.8 0.00 3.37 0.00 Idaho >=95 100.0 2.7 0.00 0.39 0.00 Illinois >=95 100.0 2.9 0.00 1.39 0.00 Indiana >95 100.0 2.4 0.00 0.89 0.00 Iowa >=95 100.0 1.5 0.00 2.02 0.00 Kansas 90-94 100.0 0.4 0.00 2.53 0.00 Kentucky >=95 100.0 0.8 0.00 1.27 0.00 Louisiana >=95 100.0 1.2 0.00 0.26 0.00 Maine >=95 100.0 1.4 0.00 0.45 0.00 Maryland >=95 100.0 0.7 0.00 0.01 0.06 Massachusetts >=95 100.0 1.6 0.00 1.26 0.00 Michigan >=95 100.0 1.1 0.05 2.27 0.01 Detroit >=95 100.0 1.1 0.02 2.35 0.02 Minnesota >=95 100.0 1.6 0.00 2.16 0.00 Mississippi Missouri >=95 100.0 2.8 0.00 0.40 0.01 Montana 90-94 100.0 4.9 0.00 2.47 0.00 Nebraska >=95 100.0 2.1 0.00 2.32 0.00 Nevada >=95 100.0 1.5 0.00 1.18 0.01 New Hampshire >=95 100.0 1.1 0.09 1.99 0.00 New Jersey >=95 100.0 1.6 0.02 1.53 0.02 New Mexico >=95 100.0 2.0 0.00 0.00 0.01 New York >=95 100.0 1.6 0.00 2.19 0.00 North Carolina 90-94 100.0 0.5 0.02 0.26 0.00 North Dakota 90-94 100.0 1.6 0.00 0.03 0.00 Ohio 90-94 100.0 3.1 0.00 3.68 0.00 Oklahoma >=95 100.0 2.6 0.00 0.82 0.03 Oregon >=95 100.0 1.0 0.00 2.51 0.00 Pennsylvania >=95 100.0 2.0 0.00 1.41 0.01 Rhode Island >=95 100.0 2.2 0.00 0.51 0.00 South Carolina >=95 100.0 2.3 0.01 0.99 0.00
Continued Appendix I Table I.1 Table I.1: Achievement of Selected Data Quality Criteria* by State and SEER Metropolitan Area Cancer Registries, 2002 Only data from the shaded states and metropolitan areas are included in United States Cancer Statistics: 2002 Incidence and Mortality.**
% Case % Passing % % Missing % Missing % Missing Cancer Registry Ascertainment*** Edits+ DCOs^ Sex Race Age
South Dakota >=95 100.0 NDC## 0.00 3.26 0.00 Tennessee Texas 90-94 100.0 4.0 0.00 1.17 0.00 Utah >=95 100.0 0.3 0.00 0.00 0.01 Vermont >=95 100.0 1.3 0.06 0.49 0.00 Virginia <90 100.0 0.9 0.00 0.73 0.00 Washington >=95 100.0 0.4 0.00 2.75 0.00 Seattle-Puget Sound >=95 100.0 0.5 0.00 0.45 0.00 West Virginia >=95 100.0 2.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wisconsin >=95 100.0 3.0 0.01 0.61 0.00 Wyoming
Note: Cancer incidence data included in this report are from statewide or metropolitan area cancer registries that meet the following data quality criteria for all cancer sites combined: Case ascertainment is 90% or more complete.
  • No more than 5% of cases are ascertained solely on the basis of a death certificate.
  • No more than 3% of cases are missing information on sex.
  • No more than 3% of cases are missing information on age.
  • No more that 5% of cases are missing information on race.
  • At least 97% of the registry's records passed a set of single-field and interfield computerized edits.
  • Notes

    * National Program of Cancer Registries (including California, Kentucky, Louisiana, and New Jersey) data quality based on January 2005 data submission; SEER data quality based on November 2004 data submission.
    ** Registry members of the National Program of Cancer Registries whose data are not included in this report chose whether to have their data quality information listed.
    *** Completeness of case ascertainment was estimated by methods developed by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries.
    + Computerized edits test the validity and logic of data components reported for selected items.
    ^ DCOs = death certificate only cases; that is, cancer cases ascertained solely on the basis of a death certificate after the registry has completed a routine procedure known as death clearance and followback.
    # Greater Bay includes San Francisco-Oakland and San Jose-Monterey Registries.
    ## NDC = no death clearance; registry did not conduct death clearance and followback.
    SEER = Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results.

    Sources:

    Howe HL. Conclusions of the Workgroup for High-Quality Criteria for Data Use: The NAACCR Narrative. Springfield, IL: North American Association of Central Cancer Registries; 2001.

    Tucker TC, Howe HL, Weir HK. Certification of population-based cancer registries. Journal of Registry Management 1999;26(1):24-27.

    Source:   U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 2002 Incidence and Mortality. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute; 2005.
    (Pages 678-9, Appendix I, pages I2-3)




    This page last reviewed: Friday, June 26, 2009
    This information is provided as technical reference material. Please contact us at cwus@cdc.gov to request a simple text version of this document.