• 2,300 women
    women were determined to be at high risk for breast cancer by the High Risk Screening Program in Ontario in 2015
  • 86%
    of cancer patients saw a registered dietitian at a regional cancer centre within 14 days of referral in 2016
  • 71%
    of stage III colon cancer patients received chemotherapy within 60 days of after surgery in 2014
  • 86%
    of all cancer surgery patients received their consult within the recommended wait time in 2016, and 87% received their surgery within the recommend wait time
  • Over 43,000
    patients were discussed at comprehensive multidisciplinary cancer conferences (MCCs) in fiscal year 2016/2017
  • About 13%
    of patients who undergo lung, prostate and colorectal surgery have an unplanned hospital visit following surgery
  • 79%
    of breast cancer patients had a guideline-recommended mammogram in the first follow-up year
  • 74%
    of colorectal cancer patients diagnosed in 2013 had a surveillance colonoscopy within 18 months of surgery
  • Over 100
    patient and family advisors, who vary by their type of cancer and experiences, represent diverse regions and work with Cancer Care Ontario to ensure a person-centred cancer system
  • 383,023
    unique patients were screened for symptom severity using Your Symptoms Matter – General Symptoms (YSM-General) in 2016
Click here to emailClick here to printClick here to share

Comparisons

 

How does Ontario compare?

“Working together to create the best cancer system in the world” is Cancer Care Ontario’s vision. Is Ontario succeeding? To find out, national and international data were compared against Ontario’s results. The selected findings presented below identify where Ontario is doing well and where improvements are needed in relation to other jurisdictions.

A note on jurisdictional comparisons

  • This is the eighth year that the Cancer System Quality Index (CSQI) has showcased international comparators for Ontario’s performance.
  • Here Ontario is compared with selected jurisdictions, in most cases because they have healthcare and data systems that are similar to those in Ontario, and because the way they measure participation is similar to Ontario.
  • Ensuring there are comparable data and measures from multiple jurisdictions is a challenge. It is wise to be mindful of the different data definitions, methodologies and years that are used for indicators measured outside of Canada. The design and context of other organized screened programs may also be different than those in Ontario. Cross-jurisdictional comparison is still useful, however, for providing a rough indication of how well Ontario is doing compared to other jurisdictions.

What aspects of cancer are we comparing?