2013 Top Ranked Hospitals for Cancer Care

Thanks for posting Casey - from time to time we've got folks looking for this type of information so it's a good add to the site.

Casey59 said...
No surprises here...LINK

Top ranked for BOTH cancer and urology: an institution frequently mentioned here at HW/PC, the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF)

Well, I for one was pretty surprised when I read the post -- sounded like like a remarkable coup for UCSF!

Then I followed the link. I guess by "top ranked" Casey meant "highly ranked" (i.e. #7 in both categories).

Here are the top 10 in each category...

Cancer:
#1 MD Anderson
#2 Memorial Sloan-Kettering
#3 Mayo
#4 Johns Hopkins
#5 Dana-Farber
#6 Mass General
#7T UCSF
#7T U of Washington
#9 Cleveland Clinic
#10 Stanford

Urology:
#1 Johns Hopkins
#2 Cleveland Clinic
#3 Mayo
#4 UCLA
#5 NYP Columbia and Cornell
#6 Vanderbilt
#7 UCSF
#8 Duke
#9 Northwestern
#10 Cedars-Sinai

Yes, njs, "a" top ranked, or a highly ranked hospital.  

 

I'll go back and simplify it... 

 

 

Post Edited (Casey59) : 7/18/2013 11:09:45 AM (GMT-6)

My DaVinci surgery was done at Vanderbilt. I am very pleased with the results and pleased to see them ranked at #6 in Urology.

  robertC said... Some of the listings allow the doctors to vote for their own hospital. Then the largest hospital gets the most votes, etc. Cleveland Clinic has about 30 urologists. MD Anderson as a gazillion oncologists. Sometimes size determines the votes. I believe in taking the listing with a grain of salt.   Hi robertC I also read how the results were generated (available on their FAQ page, HERE ), but I did not have the same conclusion.   From where did you draw that conclusion, robertC? For both urology and cancer, and 10 other of the specialties, there were four different, weighted elements which used data-driven rankings to create the overall 0 to 100 scores.   The elements, and their weightings, are: ·          Reputation with specialists (32.5% weight) – [I suppose that this, robertC, is the element which you feel could be skewed by nefarious specialists…but given the process described here, that doesn’t sound likely...]     Each year 200 physicians per specialty are randomly selected and asked to list the hospitals they consider to be the best in their specialty for complex or difficult cases.   A statistical adjustment is made to keep a small number of hospitals with very high reputational scores from swamping the rest of the field in the final rankings. The adjustment allows hospitals with low reputational scores but strong clinical numbers to outrank centers with higher reputations. Many hospitals in the rankings have very low and even zero reputational scores. ·          Survival (32.5%) – success at keeping patients alive ·          Patient Safety (5%) – blunders, injuries during surgery, major bleeding afterwards, etc. ·          Other care-related indicators (30%) – These include nurse staffing, patient volume, certain clinically proven technologies and other measures related to quality of care. Data-driven metrics.   I do believe—as the article authors themselves point out—that the list is merely a good (perhaps great) "starting point" for individual patients.

Having the combination of M.D Anderson and Scholz/Lam has thus far proven to be a team worthy of being #1 on our score sheet.

Where we were prognosis-wise July 14th, 2011 compared to where we are now almost seems like nothing short of a miracle.

We know the tide can turn at any time, but we certainly continue to work overtime enjoying each of our bonus days.

It just hit me that it's been two years since we got the dreaded news of the beast. Sometimes it seems like it was just yesterday and sometimes it seems like a lifetime ago.

TC-LasVegas said...
I think it's important to note that these lists don't determine the care you will receive. MD Anderson is a great facility, but at the end of the day, who's your doctor.

My physician, Vogelzang, is among the elite in PCa research, for example, as are Ian Thompson, Lucky Lara, Ed Messing, all terrific researchers and none at the listed sites. In addition, when you go to university hospitals, you may get the up and coming doctors and not the one's whom built the reputations of the facilities.

Tony

+1