Sebastian K. King

Dr. Sebastian K. King


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

23Years (2004-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 May 2023 in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
IHIsabel C. Hageman
Isabel C. Hageman
IRIris van Rooij
Iris van Rooij
IBIvo de Blaauw
Ivo de Blaauw
MTMisel Trajanovska
Misel Trajanovska
SKSebastian K. King
Sebastian K. King
Patient registries serve to overcome the research limitations inherent in the study of rare diseases, where patient numbers are typically small. Despite the value of real-world data collected through registries, adequate design and maintenance are integral to data quality. We aimed to describe an overview of the challenges in design, quality management, and maintenance of rare disease registries.A systematic search of English articles was conducted in PubMed, Ovid Medline/Embase, and Cochrane Library. Search terms included “rare diseases, patient registries, common data elements, quality, hospital information systems, and datasets”. Inclusion criteria were any manuscript type focused upon rare disease patient registries describing design, quality monitoring or maintenance. Biobanks and drug surveillances were excluded.A total of 37 articles, published between 2001 and 2021, met the inclusion criteria. Patient registries covered a wide range of disease areas and covered multiple geographical locations, with a predisposition for Europe. Most articles were methodological reports and described the design and setup of a registry. Most registries recruited clinical patients (92%) with informed consent (81%) and protected the collected data (76%). Whilst the majority (57%) collected patient-reported outcome measures, only few (38%) consulted PAGs during the registry design process. Few reports described details regarding quality management (51%) and maintenance (46%).Rare disease patient registries are valuable for research and evaluation of clinical care, and an increasing number have emerged. However, registries need to be continuously evaluated for data quality and long-term sustainability to remain relevant for future use.

1 December 2005 in Journal of Pediatric Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SKSebastian K. King
Sebastian K. King
JSJonathan R. Sutcliffe
Jonathan R. Sutcliffe
BSBridget R. Southwell
Bridget R. Southwell
PCPeter G. Chait
Peter G. Chait
JHJohn M. Hutson
John M. Hutson

1 December 2017 in Journal of Pediatric Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LCLucy Collins
Lucy Collins
BCBrennan Collis
Brennan Collis
MTMisel Trajanovska
Misel Trajanovska
RKRija Khanal
Rija Khanal
JHJohn M. Hutson
John M. Hutson
SKSebastian K. King
Sebastian K. King

1 December 2012 in Journal of Pediatric Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MCMelanie C.C. Clarke
Melanie C.C. Clarke
ACAnthony G. Catto-Smith
Anthony G. Catto-Smith
SKSebastian K. King
Sebastian K. King
PDPhil Dinning
Phil Dinning
ICIan J. Cook
Ian J. Cook
BSBridget R. Southwell
Bridget R. Southwell

1 December 2018 in Journal of Pediatric Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SSShreya Sood
Shreya Sood
RLReuben Lim
Reuben Lim
LCLucy Collins
Lucy Collins
MTMisel Trajanovska
Misel Trajanovska
JHJohn M. Hutson
John M. Hutson
SKSebastian K. King
Sebastian K. King

24 May 2022 in The Lancet Global Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CSCatherine A Shaw
Catherine A Shaw
RPRiinu Pius
Riinu Pius
TDThomas M Drake
Thomas M Drake
LNLisa Norman
Lisa Norman
AAAdesoji O Ademuyiwa
Adesoji O Ademuyiwa
JLJean Wilguens Lartigue
Jean Wilguens Lartigue
Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. National Institute for Health and Care Research.