CCR Innovations | Volume 2 | Issue 1 - page 7

California Cancer Registry
Volume 3, Issue 1
Care should be taken to ensure that the paƟent’s address at diagnosis is recorded in the Address at 
Diagnosis field on the abstract.  InformaƟon that is documented only in a text field may be missed. For 
example, a case may bypass visual ediƟng, and text fields will not be reviewed. 
It is important for cancer registrars to help educate hospital staff about the contribuƟon residence 
documentaƟon has in developing public health policies and in cancer surveillance. An accurate address 
at diagnosis provides populaƟon‐based registries with accurate geographic informaƟon for each 
incident case. Geographic informaƟon is used in a variety of ways, such as mapping cancer incidence 
by variable (site, stage, race/ethnicity, etc) for use in cancer control and public health acƟviƟes. 
As cancer registrars, in addiƟon to our responsibiliƟes of recording accurate data for clinical use, we all 
also carry the responsibility of recording accurate data for public health use.  Abstractors should take 
the same amount of care to determine and record residence at diagnosis as they do to determine and 
record tumor reportability and class of case. 
ChrisƟna Schwarz, CTR 
Quality Control Specialist—Audits 
Greater Bay Area Cancer Registry 
Cancer PrevenƟon InsƟtute of California 
  The ProducƟon AutomaƟon and Quality Control (PAQC) Unit has taken a 
proacƟve approach to streamlining case completeness in our database. Our 
goal is to make California cancer cases research ready as quickly as possible.  
System processes that may interfere with a case being complete and ready for research include at least 
the following:  edit errors, visual ediƟng tasks, tumor linkage, and consolidaƟon acƟviƟes.   In order to 
accomplish the goal of decreasing the Ɵme from cancer case file upload to research‐ready, our project 
team members evaluate those processes within the central registry database which currently require 
manual assistance in order to complete the case.  Examples of cases requiring some degree of manual 
work effort are outlined below:  
Cases with edit errors that require a visual editor to correct and complete the case. 
Cases with more than one tumor in the database that require a visual editor to evaluate 
and choose either to link to an exisƟng case, or create a new tumor for the paƟent. 
Cases requiring consolidaƟon conflict resoluƟon where there are mulƟple admissions for 
the same tumor, but with conflicƟng informaƟon requiring a visual editor to consolidate 
informaƟon accurately.  
PAQC Unit automaƟon projects were developed to address these types of cases and through 
the applicaƟon of an automaƟon soluƟon, reduce the amount of Ɵme a staff member directs 
towards those acƟviƟes. In this manner, regional staff can re‐direct and/or refocus on those 
acƟviƟes that are not appropriate for an automaƟon alternaƟve, such as visual ediƟng complex 
cases, audiƟng and educaƟng abstractors. 
Automation Activities
(Cont. Pg 8)
1,2,3,4,5,6 8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15