Cancer Mortality & Incidence Rates: (Country LVL)

Investigating Cancer Trends over time

By Data Exercises [source]

About this dataset

This dataset is a comprehensive collection of data from county-level cancer mortality and incidence rates in the United States between 2000-2014. This data provides an unprecedented level of detail into cancer cases, deaths, and trends at a local level. The included columns include County, FIPS, age-adjusted death rate, average death rate per year, recent trend (2) in death rates, recent 5-year trend (2) in death rates and average annual count for each county. This dataset can be used to provide deep insight into the patterns and effects of cancer on communities as well as help inform policy decisions related to mitigating risk factors or increasing preventive measures such as screenings. With this comprehensive set of records from across the United States over 15 years, you will be able to make informed decisions regarding individual patient care or policy development within your own community!

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset provides comprehensive US county-level cancer mortality and incidence rates from 2000 to 2014. It includes the mortality and incidence rate for each county, as well as whether the county met the objective of 45.5 deaths per 100,000 people. It also provides information on recent trends in death rates and average annual counts of cases over the five year period studied.

This dataset can be extremely useful to researchers looking to study trends in cancer death rates across counties. By using this data, researchers will be able to gain valuable insight into how different counties are performing in terms of providing treatment and prevention services for cancer patients and whether preventative measures and healthcare access are having an effect on reducing cancer mortality rates over time. This data can also be used to inform policy makers about counties needing more target prevention efforts or additional resources for providing better healthcare access within at risk communities.

When using this dataset, it is important to pay close attention to any qualitative columns such as “Recent Trend” or “Recent 5-Year Trend (2)” that may provide insights into long term changes that may not be readily apparent when using quantitative variables such as age-adjusted death rate or average deaths per year over shorter periods of time like one year or five years respectively. Additionally, when studying differences between different counties it is important to take note of any standard FIPS code differences that may indicate that data was collected by a different source with a difference methodology than what was used in other areas studied

Research Ideas

• Using this dataset, we can identify patterns in cancer mortality and incidence rates that are statistically significant to create treatment regimens or preventive measures specifically targeting those areas.
• This data can be useful for policymakers to target areas with elevated cancer mortality and incidence rates so they can allocate financial resources to these areas more efficiently.
• This dataset can be used to investigate which factors (such as pollution levels, access to medical care, genetic make up) may have an influence on the cancer mortality and incidence rates in different US counties

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

License: Dataset copyright by authors - You are free to: - Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially. - Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. - You must: - Give appropriate credit - Provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. - ShareAlike - You must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. - Keep intact - all notices that refer to this license, including copyright notices.

Columns

File: death .csv | Column name | Description | |:-------------------------------------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------------...

This dataset contains Age-Adjusted Rate, Confidence Interval, Average Annual Count, and Trend field information for US States for the average 5 year span from 2012 to 2016.Data is segmented by sex and age, with fields describing the sex and age group tabulated.For more information, visit statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov Data NotationsState Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.† Incidence rates (cases per 100,000 population per year) are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population seer.cancer.gov/stdpopulations/stdpop.19ages.html. Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Rates calculated using SEER*Stat. [seer.cancer.gov/seerstat]Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified [seer.cancer.gov/popdata] by NCI. The 1969-2016 US Population Data File [seer.cancer.gov/popdata] is used for SEER and NPCR incidence rates.‡ Incidence data come from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each area for additional information. Rates and trends are computed using different standards for malignancy. For more information see malignant.html.^ All Stages refers to any stage in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) summary stage [seer.cancer.gov/tools/ssm].Healthy People 2020 Objectives [www.healthypeople.gov]provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [www.cdc.gov]. Michigan Data do not include cases diagnosed in other states for those states in which the data exchange agreement specifically prohibits the release of data to third parties.Trend Data not available for Nevada.Data Source Field Key:(1) Source: CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2018 data submission and SEER November 2018 submission as published in United States Cancer Statistics nccd.cdc.gov/uscs Source: State Cancer Registry and the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2018 data submission. State rates include rates from metropolitan areas funded by SEER [seer.cancer.gov/registries].(6) Source: State Cancer Registry and the CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS) November 2018 data submission.(7) Source: SEER November 2018 submission.8 Source: Incidence data provided by the SEER Program. [seer.cancer.gov] AAPCs are calculated by the Joinpoint Regression Program [surveillance.cancer.gov/joinpoint] and are based on APCs. Data are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population www.seer.cancer.gov/stdpopulations/single_age.html. Rates are for invasive cancer only (except for bladder cancer which is invasive and in situ) or unless otherwise specified. Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI. The 1969-2017 US Population Data [seer.cancer.gov/popdata] File is used with SEER November 2018 data. Please note that the data comes from different sources. Due to different years [statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/historicaltrend/differences.html] of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. [seer.cancer.gov/seerstat] Please refer to the source for each graph for additional information. Some data are not available [http://statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/datanotavailable.html] for combinations of geography, cancer site, age, and race/ethnicity.

Death rate has been age-adjusted by the 2000 U.S. standard population. Single-year data are only available for Los Angeles County overall, Service Planning Areas, Supervisorial Districts, City of Los Angeles overall, and City of Los Angeles Council Districts.Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death in the US. People who smoke have the greatest risk of lung cancer, though lung cancer can also occur in people who have never smoked. Most cases are due to long-term tobacco smoking or exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke. Cities and communities can take an active role in curbing tobacco use and reducing lung cancer by adopting policies to regulate tobacco retail; reducing exposure to secondhand smoke in outdoor public spaces, such as parks, restaurants, or in multi-unit housing; and improving access to tobacco cessation programs and other preventive services.For more information about the Community Health Profiles Data Initiative, please see the initiative homepage.

AbstractIn Italy, approximately 400.000 new cases of malignant tumors are recorded every year. The average of annual deaths caused by tumors, according to the Italian Cancer Registers, is about 3.5 deaths and about 2.5 per 1,000 men and women respectively, for a total of about 3 deaths every 1,000 people. Long-term (at least a decade) and spatially detailed data (up to the municipality scale) are neither easily accessible nor fully available for public consultation by the citizens, scientists, research groups, and associations. Therefore, here we present a ten-year (2009–2018) database on cancer mortality rates (in the form of Standardized Mortality Ratios, SMR) for 23 cancer macro-types in Italy on municipal, provincial, and regional scales. We aim to make easily accessible a comprehensive, ready-to-use, and openly accessible source of data on the most updated status of cancer mortality in Italy for local and national stakeholders, researchers, and policymakers and to provide researchers with ready-to-use data to perform specific studies. Methods For a given locality, year, and cause of death, the SMR is the ratio between the observed number of deaths (Om) and the number of expected deaths (Em): SMR = Om/Em (1) where Om should be an available observational data and Em is estimated as the weighted sum of age-specific population size for the given locality (ni) per age-specific death rates of the reference population (MRi): Em = sum(MRi x ni) (2) MRi could be provided by a public health organization or be estimated as the ratio between the age-specific number of deaths of reference population (Mi) to the age-specific reference population size (Ni): MRi = Mi/Ni (3) Thus, the value of Em is weighted by the age distribution of deaths and population size. SMR assumes value 1 when the number of observed and expected deaths are equal. Following eqns. (1-3), the SMR was computed for single years of the period 2009-2018 and for single cause of death as defined by the International ICD-10 classification system by using the following data: age-specific number of deaths by cause of reference population (i.e., Mi) from the Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT, (http://www.istat.it/en/, last access: 26/01/2022)); age-specific census data on reference population (i.e., Ni) from ISTAT; the observed number of deaths by cause (i.e., Om) from ISTAT; the age-specific census data on population (ni); the SMR was estimated at three different level of aggregation: municipal, provincial (equivalent to the European classification NUTS 3) and regional (i.e., NUTS2). The SMR was also computed for the broad category of malignant tumors (i.e. C00-C979, hereinafter cancer macro-type C), and for the broad category of malignant tumor plus non-malignant tumors (i.e. C00-C979 plus D0-D489, hereinafter cancer macro-type CD). Lower 90% and 95% confidence intervals of 10-year average values were computed according to the Byar method.

https://www.cancerimagingarchive.net/wp-content/uploads/nctn-logo-300x108.png" alt="" width="300" height="108" />

Demographic Summary of Available Imaging

Characteristic	Value (N = 26254)
Age (years)	Mean ± SD: 61.4± 5 Median (IQR): 60 (57-65) Range: 43-75
Sex	Male: 15512 (59%) Female: 10742 (41%)
Race	White: 23969 (91.3%) Black: 1135 (4.3%) Asian: 547 (2.1%) American Indian/Alaska Native: 88 (0.3%) Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: 87 (0.3%) Unknown: 428 (1.6%)
Ethnicity	Not Available

Background: The aggressive and heterogeneous nature of lung cancer has thwarted efforts to reduce mortality from this cancer through the use of screening. The advent of low-dose helical computed tomography (CT) altered the landscape of lung-cancer screening, with studies indicating that low-dose CT detects many tumors at early stages. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) was conducted to determine whether screening with low-dose CT could reduce mortality from lung cancer.

Methods: From August 2002 through April 2004, we enrolled 53,454 persons at high risk for lung cancer at 33 U.S. medical centers. Participants were randomly assigned to undergo three annual screenings with either low-dose CT (26,722 participants) or single-view posteroanterior chest radiography (26,732). Data were collected on cases of lung cancer and deaths from lung cancer that occurred through December 31, 2009. This dataset includes the low-dose CT scans from 26,254 of these subjects, as well as digitized histopathology images from 451 subjects.

Results: The rate of adherence to screening was more than 90%. The rate of positive screening tests was 24.2% with low-dose CT and 6.9% with radiography over all three rounds. A total of 96.4% of the positive screening results in the low-dose CT group and 94.5% in the radiography group were false positive results. The incidence of lung cancer was 645 cases per 100,000 person-years (1060 cancers) in the low-dose CT group, as compared with 572 cases per 100,000 person-years (941 cancers) in the radiography group (rate ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.23). There were 247 deaths from lung cancer per 100,000 person-years in the low-dose CT group and 309 deaths per 100,000 person-years in the radiography group, representing a relative reduction in mortality from lung cancer with low-dose CT screening of 20.0% (95% CI, 6.8 to 26.7; P=0.004). The rate of death from any cause was reduced in the low-dose CT group, as compared with the radiography group, by 6.7% (95% CI, 1.2 to 13.6; P=0.02).

Conclusions: Screening with the use of low-dose CT reduces mortality from lung cancer. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; National Lung Screening Trial ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047385).

Data Availability: A summary of the National Lung Screening Trial and its available datasets are provided on the Cancer Data Access System (CDAS). CDAS is maintained by Information Management System (IMS), contracted by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) as keepers and statistical analyzers of the NLST trial data. The full clinical data set from NLST is available through CDAS. Users of TCIA can download without restriction a publicly distributable subset of that clinical data, along with the CT and Histopathology images collected during the trial. (These previously were restricted.)

Do you know further standard populations?

If you know any further standard populations worth integrating in this dataset, please let me know in the discussion part. I would be happy to integrate further data to make this dataset more useful for everybody.

German "Federal Health Monitoring System" about 'standard populations':

"Standard populations are "artificial populations" with fictitious age structures, that are used in age standardization as uniform basis for the calculation of comparable measures for the respective reference population(s).

Use: Age standardizations based on a standard population are often used at cancer registries to compare morbidity or mortality rates. If there are different age structures in populations of different regions or in a population in one region over time, the comparability of their mortality or morbidity rates is only limited. For interregional or inter-temporal comparisons, therefore, an age standardization is necessary. For this purpose the age structure of a reference population, the so-called standard population, is assumed for the study population. The age specific mortality or morbidity rates of the study population are weighted according to the age structure of the standard population. Selection of a standard population:

Which standard population is used for comparison basically, does not matter. It is important, however, that

1. the demographic structure of the standard population is not too dissimilar to that of the reference population and
2. the comparable rates refer to the same standard."

Aim of this dataset

The aim of this dataset is to provide a variety of the most commonly used 'standard populations'.

Currently, two files with 22 standard populations are provided: - standard_populations_20_age_groups.csv - 20 age groups: '0', '01-04', '05-09', '10-14', '15-19', '20-24', '25-29', '30-34', '35-39', '40-44', '45-49', '50-54', '55-59', '60-64', '65-69', '70-74', '75-79', '80-84', '85-89', '90+' - 7 standard populations: 'Standard population Germany 2011', 'Standard population Germany 1987', 'Standard population of Europe 2013', 'Standard population Old Laender 1987', 'Standard population New Laender 1987', 'New standard population of Europe', 'World standard population' - source: German Federal Health Monitoring System

• standard_populations_19_age_groups.csv
  • 19 age groups: '0', '01-04', '05-09', '10-14', '15-19', '20-24', '25-29', '30-34', '35-39', '40-44', '45-49', '50-54', '55-59', '60-64', '65-69', '70-74', '75-79', '80-84', '85+'
  • 15 standard populations: '1940 U.S. Std Million', '1950 U.S. Std Million', '1960 U.S. Std Million', '1970 U.S. Std Million', '1980 U.S. Std Million', '1990 U.S. Std Million', '1991 Canadian Std Million', '1996 Canadian Std Million', '2000 U.S. Std Million', '2000 U.S. Std Population (Census P25-1130)', '2011 Canadian Standard Population', 'European (EU-27 plus EFTA 2011-2030) Std Million', 'European (Scandinavian 1960) Std Million', 'World (Segi 1960) Std Million', 'World (WHO 2000-2025) Std Million'
  • source: National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program

Terms of use

No restrictions are known to the author. Standard populations are published by different organisations for public usage.

Community Health Status Indicators (CHSI) to combat obesity, heart disease, and cancer are major components of the Community Health Data Initiative. This dataset provides key health indicators for local communities and encourages dialogue about actions that can be taken to improve community health (e.g., obesity, heart disease, cancer). The CHSI report and dataset was designed not only for public health professionals but also for members of the community who are interested in the health of their community. The CHSI report contains over 200 measures for each of the 3,141 United States counties. Although CHSI presents indicators like deaths due to heart disease and cancer, it is imperative to understand that behavioral factors such as obesity, tobacco use, diet, physical activity, alcohol and drug use, sexual behavior and others substantially contribute to these deaths.

Data Story

It was a project about chest cancer detection using machine learning and deep leaning (CNN) . we classify and diagnose if the patient have cancer or not using AI model . We give them the information about the type of cancer and the way of treatment. we tried to collect all data we need to make the model classify the images easily. so i had to fetch data from many resources to start the project . I researched a lot to collect all the data from many resources and cleaned it for the CNN .

Data

Images are not in dcm format, the images are in jpg or png to fit the model Data contain 3 chest cancer types which are Adenocarcinoma,Large cell carcinoma, Squamous cell carcinoma , and 1 folder for the normal cell Data folder is the main folder that contain all the step folders inside Data folder are test , train , valid

test represent testing set train represent training set valid represent validation set training set is 70% testing set is 20% validation set is 10%

1. Adenocarcinoma

Adenocarcinoma of the lung: Lung adenocarcinoma is the most common form of lung cancer accounting for 30 percent of all cases overall and about 40 percent of all non-small cell lung cancer occurrences. Adenocarcinomas are found in several common cancers, including breast, prostate and colorectal. Adenocarcinomas of the lung are found in the outer region of the lung in glands that secrete mucus and help us breathe. Symptoms include coughing, hoarseness, weight loss and weakness.

1. Large cell carcinoma

Large-cell undifferentiated carcinoma: Large-cell undifferentiated carcinoma lung cancer grows and spreads quickly and can be found anywhere in the lung. This type of lung cancer usually accounts for 10 to 15 percent of all cases of NSCLC. Large-cell undifferentiated carcinoma tends to grow and spread quickly.

1. Squamous cell carcinoma

Squamous cell: This type of lung cancer is found centrally in the lung, where the larger bronchi join the trachea to the lung, or in one of the main airway branches. Squamous cell lung cancer is responsible for about 30 percent of all non-small cell lung cancers, and is generally linked to smoking.

And the last folder is the normal CT-Scan images

Acknowledgements

We wouldn't be here without the help of others and the resources we found. thanks for all of my team and the people who supported us

Inspiration

I want to hear all your feedback

breastcanc-ultrasound-class

  Background

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide, according to IHME - Global Burden of Disease, with 10.7 mln casualties in 2019.

Amongst the various types of cancer, a huge role is played by breast cancer, which stands in 4th position among the deadliest tumors, with more than 700.000 deaths during 2019 (IHME - Global Burden of Disease).

Moreover, breast cancer has the highest share of number of cases/100 people worldwide… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/as-cle-bert/breastcancer-auto-segmentation.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has risen dramatically in the past few decades. The cause of this is unclear, but several lines of evidence indicate it is largely due to overdiagnosis, the diagnosis of tumors that would have never manifest clinically if untreated. Practices leading to overdiagnosis may relate to defensive medicine. In this study, we evaluated the association between malpractice climate and incidence of thyroid, breast, prostate, colon, and lung cancer in U.S. states from 1999–2012 using publicly available government data. State-level malpractice risk was quantified as malpractice payout rate, the number of malpractice payouts per 100,000 people per state per year. Associations between state-level cancer incidence, malpractice payout rate, and several cancer risk factors were evaluated. Risk factors included several social determinants of health, including factors predicting healthcare access. States with higher malpractice payout rate had higher thyroid cancer incidence, on both univariate analysis (r = 0.51, P = 0.009, Spearman) and multivariate analysis (P

This study aimed to identify the trends in the incidence of thymic cancer, i.e., thymoma, thymic carcinoma, and thymic neuroendocrine tumor, in the United States. Data from the United States Cancer Statistics (USCS) database (2001–2015) and those from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (SEER 9 [1973–2015], SEER 13 [1992–2015], and SEER 18 [2000–2015]) were used in this study. All incidences were per 100,000 population at risk. The trends in incidence were described as annual percent change (APC) using the Joinpoint regression program. Data from the USCS (2001–2015) database showed an increase in thymic cancer diagnosis with an APC of 4.89% from 2001 to 2006, which is mainly attributed to the significant increase in the incidence of thymoma and thymic carcinoma particularly in women. The incidence of thymic cancer did not increase from 2006 to 2015, which may be attributed to the increase in the diagnosis of thymic carcinoma from 2004 to 2015, with a concomitant decrease in thymoma from 2008 to 2015. Before declining, the age-specific incidence of thymic cancer peaked at ages 70–74 years, with a peak incidence at 1.06 per 100,000 population, and decreased in older age groups. The incidence of thymic cancer was higher in men than in women. Asian/Pacific Islanders had the highest incidence of thymoma, followed by black and then white people. The incidence of thymic carcinoma increased from 2004 to 2015, with a concomitant decrease in thymoma from 2008 to 2015. Asian/Pacific Islanders had the highest incidence of thymoma than other races.

breastcanc-ultrasound-class

  Background

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide, according to IHME - Global Burden of Disease, with 10.7 mln casualties in 2019.

Amongst the various types of cancer, a huge role is played by breast cancer, which stands in 4th position among the deadliest tumors, with more than 700.000 deaths during 2019 (IHME - Global Burden of Disease).

Moreover, breast cancer has the highest share of number of cases/100 people worldwide… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/as-cle-bert/breastcancer-auto-objdetect.

breastcanc-ultrasound-class

  Background

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide, according to IHME - Global Burden of Disease, with 10.7 mln casualties in 2019.

Amongst the various types of cancer, a huge role is played by breast cancer, which stands in 4th position among the deadliest tumors, with more than 700.000 deaths during 2019 (IHME - Global Burden of Disease).

Moreover, breast cancer has the highest share of number of cases/100 people worldwide… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/as-cle-bert/breastcanc-ultrasound-class.

Breast cancer is the second largest cause of cancer death among U.S. women and the leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified several genetic variants associated with susceptibility to breast cancer, but these still explain less than half of the estimated genetic contribution to the disease. Combinations of variants (i.e. genetic interactions) may play an important role in breast cancer susceptibility. However, due to a lack of statistical power, the current tests for genetic interactions from GWAS data mainly leverage prior knowledge to focus on small sets of genes or SNPs that are known to have an association with breast cancer. Thus, many genetic interactions, particularly among novel variants, remain understudied. Reverse-genetic interaction screens in model organisms have shown that genetic interactions frequently cluster into highly structured motifs, where members of the same pathway share similar patterns of genetic interactions. Based on this key observation, we recently developed a method called BridGE to search for such structured motifs in genetic networks derived from GWAS studies and identify pathway-level genetic interactions in human populations. We applied BridGE to six independent breast cancer cohorts and identified significant pathway-level interactions in five cohorts. Joint analysis across all five cohorts revealed a high confidence consensus set of genetic interactions with support in multiple cohorts. The discovered interactions implicated the glutathione conjugation, vitamin D receptor, purine metabolism, mitotic prometaphase, and steroid hormone biosynthesis pathways as major modifiers of breast cancer risk. Notably, while many of the pathways identified by BridGE show clear relevance to breast cancer, variants in these pathways had not been previously discovered by traditional single variant association tests, or single pathway enrichment analysis that does not consider SNP-SNP interactions.

IntroductionThe purpose of this study is to culturally adapt the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer (ABC) measure for use in the Hispanic/Latino population living in the United States (US).MethodsIn accordance with Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) Consortium guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of measures for content and linguistic validity, we conducted: two forward-translations, reconciliation, two back-translations, revision and harmonization, six cognitive interviews, revision, external expert review, and finalization of the version. We used a mixed methods approach, conducting cognitive interviews with Hispanic/Latino community members while also convening an expert panel of six clinicians, health professionals, and community representatives and including the in the entire process. After cross-culturally adapting the ABC measure, we assessed the psychometric properties of the instrument using item response theory analysis. Item parameters, discrimination and category thresholds, and standard errors were calculated. For each of the adapted subdomains, we used item information curves to report the graphical profile of item effectiveness.ResultsTwenty-two Hispanic/Latino community members were enrolled in cognitive interviews, and Hispanics/Latinos fluent in Spanish completed the measure to assess its psychometric properties. Cognitive interviews revealed opportunities to improve items. Key changes from the original measure include the inclusion of gender inclusive language and an inquiry into e-cigarette use on items related to smoking habits. Psychometric property analyses revealed that the anticipated delay in seeking medical help, general cancer beliefs, and cancer screening beliefs and behaviors subdomains had some slope parameters that were < 1; this implies that those items were not able to adequately discriminate the latent trait and had poor performance.DiscussionThe adapted ABC measure for US Hispanics/Latinos meets content and linguistic validity standards, with construct validity confirmed for cancer symptom recognition and barriers to symptomatic presentation subdomains, but revisions are necessary for others, highlighting the need for ongoing refinement to ensure the cultural appropriateness of instruments.