title: Validity of breast, lung and colorectal cancer diagnoses in administrative databases: a systematic review protocol.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Breast, lung and colorectal cancers constitute the most common cancers worldwide and their epidemiology, related health outcomes and quality indicators can be studied using administrative healthcare databases. To constitute a reliable source for research, administrative healthcare databases need to be validated. The aim of this protocol is to perform the first systematic review of studies reporting the validation of International Classification of Diseases 9th and 10th revision codes to identify breast, lung and colorectal cancer diagnoses in administrative healthcare databases.
  
  
  METHODS
  This review protocol has been developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. We will search the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, using appropriate search strategies. We will include validation studies that used administrative data to identify breast, lung and colorectal cancer diagnoses or studies that evaluated the validity of breast, lung and colorectal cancer codes in administrative data. The following inclusion criteria will be used: (1) the presence of a reference standard case definition for the disease of interest; (2) the presence of at least one test measure (eg, sensitivity, positive predictive values, etc) and (3) the use of data source from an administrative database. Pairs of reviewers will independently abstract data using standardised forms and will assess quality using a checklist based on the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy (STARD) criteria.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Ethics approval is not required. We will submit results of this study to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. The results will serve as a guide to identify appropriate case definitions and algorithms of breast, lung and colorectal cancers for researchers involved in validating administrative healthcare databases as well as for outcome research on these conditions that used administrative healthcare databases.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  CRD42015026881.
authors.affiliation: Health Planning Service, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy.
authors.forename: Iosief
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Abraha
authors.affiliation: Health Planning Service, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy.
authors.forename: Gianni
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Giovannini
authors.affiliation: Epidemiology and Biostatistic Unit, IRCCS Centro di Riferimento Oncologico Aviano, Aviano, Italy.
authors.forename: Diego
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Serraino
authors.affiliation: Registro Tumori Regione Campania, ASL NA3 Sud, Brusciano (Na), Italy.
authors.forename: Mario
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Fusco
authors.affiliation: Health Planning Service, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy.
authors.forename: Alessandro
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Montedori
mesh_terms: D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D016208:Databases, Factual; D006801:Humans; D038801:International Classification of Diseases / Q000592:standards*; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D012107:Research Design; D000078202:Systematic Reviews as Topic
keywords: Administrative database; Breast, lung and colorectal disease; International Classification of Diseases; Sensitivity and Specificity; Validity