Code : 9345-345044      Created Date : Monday, February 16, 2015   Update Date : Monday, February 16, 2015    Visit : 1922

World Cancer Congress, 2014

The report of World Cancer Congress, 2014 by Dr. Kazem Zendehdel
 
Application Code :
306-0214-0125
 
Created Date : Saturday, December 6, 2014 14:47:23Update Date : Wednesday, January 28, 2015 14:31:12IP Address :212.95.159.250
Submit Date : Wednesday, January 28, 2015 14:31:26Email : kzendeh@tums.ac.ir
Personal Information
Name : Kazem
Surname : Zendehdel
School/Research center : Cancer Institute of I.R.Iran Cancer Research Center (CRC)
If you choose other, please name your Research center :  
Possition : Associate professor
Tel : +98-21-66581638
Information of Congress
Title of the Congress : World Cancer Congress, 2014
Title of your Abstract : Developing standards tool and evaluation of population based cancer registry in Iran
country : Austrailia
From : Tuesday, December 2, 2014
To : Sunday, December 7, 2014
Abstract(Please copy/paste the abstract send to the congress) : Developing standards tool and evaluation of population based cancer registry in Iran (#716) 
Kazem Zendehdel 1 Abbas Sheikhtaheri 1 2, AZIN NAHVIJOU 1 Zahra Sedighi 1 Mohammad Golmahi 1 Maryam Hadji 1 
1. Cancer Research Center, Cancer Institute of Iran, Imam Khomeini hospital, Tehran University of medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2. Health Information Management, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Background: Cancer registry (CR) is one of the main infrastructures for planning and evaluation of National Cancer Control Program (NCCP). A national program for pathology based cancer registry was established in Iran in 1989. Recently, a few provinces updated the program and performed population based cancer registry (PBCR). 
Aim: We aimed to develop an assessment tool and evaluate quality of Iranian PBCR according to the international standards. 
Methods: We developed a validated questionnaire based on the cancer registry standards, based on the PBCR standards of the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR). We used this questionnaire and assessed the guideline, annual report, information technology, and organization structure of the national PBCR of Iran. In addition, we studied the knowledge, attitude, and practice of PBCR personnel, at the national, regional and laboratory level. We further, evaluated the quality indicators and coverage of PBCR. 
Results: In overall, about 50% of the NACCR standards were not considered in the Iranian PBCR. Knowledge of PBCR personnel was low, particularly in the laboratory and city level. In addition, they did not have adequate performance about their job in the PBCR. Coding was not done in the laboratory level and coverage of reporting was considerably low. We estimated that the percentage of Death Certificate Only (DCO) was more than 20%. We provided 27 recommendations in different sections for improvement of PBCR. The Iranian government has updated the PBCR program according to our recommendation in order to achieve the international standards.
Conclusions: An active and continuous monitoring of the routine practice is needed to improve the quality of PBCR. The development of this questionnaire was useful tool for the assessment of PBRC, and can be used for improvement of cancer registration program in other countries. 
 
Keywords of your Abstract : Cancer Regoistry, Standards, Evaluation, Developing Country, Iran
Acceptance Letter : http://gsia.tums.ac.ir/images/UserFiles/23098/Forms/306/Acceptance_Letter.pdf
The presentation : eposter
The Cover of Abstract book :
Published abstract in the abstract book with the related code :
Where has your abstract been indexed? : ISI
If you choose other, please name :  
The Congress Reporting Form
How many volunteers were present at the Congress? : 2700
Delegates from which countries presented in the congress? : all over world including France, Japan, China, Malysia, UK, USA, and etc.
Were the delegates of any other organizations present in the congress? : Yes
If yes, please write the names of the organizations in the box : too many organizations
What were the responses to your talking points? Were specific questions or concerns raised? : they wanted to know if they can access to out standard tools for their own evalaution. We also discussed that probalbly the evlaution form will be differn by time and place.
If you met staff members, please list their full names & positions. : 1-Proff. Max Parkin, head of Africal Cancer Registry Network
2-Proff. Freddi Bray, Head of Cancer Registry, International Agency for research on Cancer (IARC)
3-Proff. Rajish, Head of Westwer Asia Cancer Registry
4-Dr Snakara, Head of Cerivcal Cancer Prevention group, IARC
5-Proff. Tajima, Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
6-Proff Tezar Kutluk, Presedident of Uinion International Cancer Congress
7-Dr Jamal Khader, Director, International Affair office, King Hosein Center
8-Dr Adam Chapman, Manager, Cancer Service Information, Department of Health, Melbourn, Austrailia
Please inform us if there are any follow up actions we need to talk with the members of the congress : We setup a reginal working group for Middle East area We will communicate to strenth our collaboration. now we are exchaing emails and discussing the how to proceed. We also decided to use our evlaution form after intervention in the cancer registration system in Iran and report the new evlaution reults. it will show the efficay of our apporach for standardization of the caner registry in Iran and will provide informative results to other low and middle income countries.
Your experiences about the travel processes(Providing ticket, accommodation,...) : difficult arrangment and very expensive trip.
Please give a briefing of your own observations and outcomes of the congress: : It was fruitful trip. We will sign a MoU with International Agency for Research on Caner (IARC) to promote cancer registry in Iran. 
I also had a chance to visit Vicotoria Cancer Registry Office in Melbourn and learned form their exprience. 
the good thing with this congress is that at the same time we had about 4-5 parallel sessions and it was possible for us to find at leat on panel discussion eac time and benfit from the presnetons. netowrking sessions was quite usefule as well. we meet a lot of peaple from all ovet the worlds and chated about the possiblity of future collaboration. unfortunatly, we hade few repesentetive from Iran. We were about 5-10 peole. however a counmtry like Turkey, Jordan, Emirate had a good presentation in the conference. economic burden in important and needs to be solved somehow to facilitate attendance of our scietists in such a congress.

 

Your Comments :
captcha
Close