Navigation

Support

Waterproof watch is how to distinguish between the Watch waterproof function is swiss replica watches generally divided into 30 meters, 50 meters, 100 meters, the main environment, the back cover, the table to the anti The water to reach the corresponding standard waterproof apron. 30 meters water table, which can be used for rolex replica daily grooming or rain, splashing on the surface water is only And there is no water pressure on the table. 50 meters waterproof table is suitable for swimming and housework, 100 meters waterproof table can be used for newwatchesoutlet swimming and diving under water.General waterproof Tables are not in the hot water bath, sauna, environment or the great changes in temperature. Because the waterproof apron will be affected by temperature and thermal expansion and contraction gap thus accelerated aging Influence waterproof function. And the water vapor around the molecule is relatively small, it is easy to penetrate the body, damage to the internal machinery.List to be kept in normal position, thread gauge The screw, do not adjust the table in the water.Even if the table is a professional waterproof waterproof apron also should be replaced after a year, otherwise its waterproof performance can not be guaranteed.The quartz watch is best to replace the waterproof component at the time of rolex replica uk changing the battery, so as to ensure the waterproof performance is good. Diamond watches the diamond is really

Record Details

Title Evaluation of NHIA Submissions for 1997-2001
Author Howe, HL
Secondary Authors
Publication Type (Help) booklet
Month January
Year 2005
How Published
Note
URL http://www.naaccr.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=XIcdgmGfx5Y%3d&tabid=95&mid=477
PubMed ID
NCI Id
EPub Date
Citation Howe HL. Evaluation of NHIA Submissions for 1997-2001. Springfield, IL: North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, January 2005. [http://www.naaccr.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=XIcdgmGfx5Y%3d&tabid=95&mid=477.]
  BibTex    


Abstract

In December 2003, the NAACCR Call for 1995-2001 Data required that all submitting registries run the NAACCR Hispanic Identification Algorithm (NHIA) on the file and the 5 years, 1997-2001, were used to evaluate the outcomes of the algorithm in registries throughout the United States. This evaluation was conducted in anticipation of NAACCR publishing rates for Latinos annually, beginning with the December 2004 NAACCR Call for Data submission for the 2005 Cancer in North America. Fifty-one registries submitted a data file and only four did not run NHIA. For 26 registries, this was the first time that NHIA had been run. Of the 47 registries that ran NHIA, four registries encountered execution problems. Among the 43 registries that correctly ran NHIA, seven registries had rates that were inconsistent with rates produced by other registries. Among these seven, data from two registries produced rates that were too low. Neither registry had attained the NAACCR data quality standard for completeness (i.e., at least 90 percent), which may contribute to the lower incidence rates. Data from five registries produced rates that appeared to be too high, three of the states with extremely small numbers of Latino cases, which apparently were not able to produce a stable estimate, even over a 5-year period. NHIA is a useful and generally reliable method to enhance the ethnic identification of the U.S. Latino population. NHIA will continue to be evaluated to improve the validity of indirect assignment of a Latino ethnicity.



Keywords

Keyword
evaluation
nhia
submission