论文部分内容阅读
[目的]对我国目前肿瘤登记点的代表性进行分析,为将来登记处建设规划提供依据。[方法]对上报全国肿瘤登记中心的2004年年报的死亡登记数据与全国第三次死因调查结果相比较,用负二项回归方法对相对死亡率指数进行统计学检验,验证登记点与死因监测点主要肿瘤死亡率的符合程度。[结果]肿瘤登记点合计以及城市地区死亡率和死因调查结果接近;而农村地区死亡率比死因调查结果高13%,男性和女性分别高15.7%和10.7%,差别较为显著。[结论]我国肿瘤登记处数据在全国水平有一定的代表性,但尚不能反映不同地区的实际肿瘤负担,尤其对农村地区的实际水平有所高估,主要癌肿差异显著。在下一步的肿瘤登记规划中,应加强对农村地区非肿瘤高发区的登记网络建设。
[Objective] To analyze the representativeness of current tumor registration points in our country and provide the basis for the future registration planning. [Method] The death registration data of the 2004 annual report to the National Tumor Registry was compared with the third national survey of cause of death. The negative second regression method was used to test the relative mortality index to verify the registration points and the cause of death monitoring Point of coincidence of major cancer mortality. [Results] The total number of cancer registration points and urban area mortality and the cause of death survey were similar. However, the mortality rate in rural areas was 13% higher than the cause of death survey and 15.7% and 10.7% higher in males and females, respectively. [Conclusion] Tumor Registry data in our country are representative at the national level, but they still can not reflect the actual tumor burden in different regions. In particular, the actual tumor levels in rural areas are overestimated, with significant differences in the major cancers. In the next step of the cancer registration plan, should strengthen the registration network in rural areas of non-tumor-prone areas.