Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 2, 2026
Using Human Differentially Expressed Gene Lists to Perform Downstream Pathway Enrichment Analysis and Target Prioritization
Published on: October 3, 2025
Development targets in the clinical quality registries for cancer and non-cancer diseases
Amalie Helme Simoni1, Lina Marie Vinge Ahlstrøm2, Anne Gulbech Ording1
1Danish Center for Health Services Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Selma Lagerløfs Vej 249, Gistrup 9260, Denmark.
Background:
The Danish clinical quality registries contribute to clinical quality improvement by utilizing quality indicators and development targets. This study examines fulfillment of development targets across all registries for cancer and non-cancer diseases at national, regional, and hospital levels.
Methods:
Annual summarized data from Danish clinical quality registries (2019-2023) were accessed. The proportion of fulfilled development targets was presented overall and in strata according to registries covering cancer or non-cancer diseases, indicators describing processes or results, and established or supplemental indicators. Regional differences and changes over time were evaluated.
Results:
The data evaluated 13,305,861 patient pathways and 697 indicators from 65 registries. Overall, 57% of hospital-level development targets were fulfilled (median 58%, IQR:44-76%). The 24 cancer registries fulfilled 63% of targets (median 60%, IQR:49-76%), while the 41 non-cancer registries fulfilled 54% (median 54%, IQR:38-75%). Fulfillment was higher for result indicators (68%) than process indicators (44%), and for established (56%) than supplemental indicators (44%). Regional fulfillment ranged from 50% (Region Zealand) to 64% (the Central Denmark Region). Target fulfillment increased by five percentagepoints during the study period.
Conclusions:
The Danish clinical quality registers varied in the approach to defining development targets, ranging from very conservative to very ambitious. The development targets were more ambitious for registries of non-cancer diseases than cancer diseases, more ambitious for process- than for result indicators, and more ambitious for supplemental compared to established indicators.
Policy Summary:
Setting clinical quality improvement targets requires balancing ambition with realism. The ambitious target setting for supplemental (often new) indicators and process indicators is expected, as these have a high potential for further improvement. The data suggest that the Danish clinical quality registries in cancer diseases could benefit from raising some of the development targets.
More Related Videos
07:13Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model
Published on: April 18, 2025
05:17Detection of Targetable Alterations in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer using Next-generation Sequencing
Published on: October 10, 2025
Related Concept Videos
02:57Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
01:21Cancer Survival Analysis
01:11Clinical Trials: Overview
01:16Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
01:30Health Information Technology and Healthcare Information System
Health Information Technology, commonly called HIT, integrates advanced information systems and technology in healthcare settings. Its primary functions include:
02:49Cancer Therapies
However, cancer treatments can pose several challenges, as therapies used to kill cancer cells are generally also toxic to normal cells. Moreover, cancer cells mutate rapidly and can develop resistance to chemical agents or radiation therapy. Besides, all types of cancer cells may not respond to the same therapy. Some cancer cells respond to one...