HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Enterline, J P Articles by Powell, G C Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Enterline, J P Articles by Powell, G C

United States cancer reporting laws: structure and utility.

J P Enterline, A Kammer, E B Gold, R Lenhard, Jr and G C Powell

Authorities in 52 United States jurisdictions were contacted to determine the existence and structure of cancer reporting laws and registration systems. Of the 52 US reporting areas examined; 30 (58 per cent) had a law requiring cancer reporting; 36 (69 per cent) of the reporting areas had at least one centralized cancer registry covering a geographically defined population. Among the 30 areas with cancer reporting laws, 26 had population-based registries; of the 22 areas with no cancer reporting law, 10 had a population-based registry. Among the 30 areas with cancer reporting laws, 12 required one reporting source (hospital, physician, laboratory), 11 required two reporting sources, four required three reporting sources, two areas gave the health department the authority to designate reporting sources, and one did not specify any reporting source. While 11 of the laws provided legal protection for both the data provider and the cancer patient, eight did not specify any such legal protection. While 13 laws made provisions for research uses of cancer reporting data, 17 did not do so. None of the laws had ever been legally tested at or beyond the State Appellate Court level.