Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20075152›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2010

Social variations in access to hospital care for patients with colorectal, breast, and lung cancer between 1999 and 2006: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics.

Rosalind Raine, Wun Wong, Shaun Scholes, Charlotte Ashton, Austin Obichere, Gareth Ambler

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Patterns of colorectal cancer care in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2013
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rosalind RaineDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT. r.raine@ucl.ac.uk
Wun Wong
Shaun Scholes
Charlotte Ashton
Austin Obichere
Gareth Ambler
University College London · GBUniversity College Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the extent to which type of hospital admission (emergency compared with elective) and surgical procedure varied by socioeconomic circumstances, age, sex, and year of admission for colorectal, breast, and lung cancer.

designRepeated cross sectional study with data from individual patients, 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2006.

settingHospital episode statistics (HES) dataset.

participants564 821 patients aged 50 and over admitted with a diagnosis of colorectal, breast, or lung cancer.

main outcome measuresProportion of patients admitted as emergencies, and the proportion receiving the recommended surgical treatment.

resultsPatients from deprived areas, older people, and women were more likely to be admitted as emergencies. For example, the adjusted odds ratio for patients with breast cancer in the least compared with most deprived fifth of deprivation was 0.63 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.66) and the adjusted odds ratio for patients with lung cancer aged 80-89 compared with those aged 50-59 was 3.13 (2.93 to 3.34). There were some improvements in disparities between age groups but not for patients living in deprived areas over time. Patients from deprived areas were less likely to receive preferred procedures for rectal, breast, and lung cancer. These findings did not improve with time. For example, 67.4% (3529/5237) of patients in the most deprived fifth of deprivation had anterior resection for rectal cancer compared with 75.5% (4497/5959) of patients in the least deprived fifth (1.34, 1.22 to 1.47). Over half (54.0%, 11 256/20 849) of patients in the most deprived fifth of deprivation had breast conserving surgery compared with 63.7% (18 445/28 960) of patients in the least deprived fifth (1.21, 1.16 to 1.26). Men were less likely than women to undergo anterior resection and lung cancer resection and older people were less likely to receive breast conserving surgery and lung cancer resection. For example, the adjusted odds ratio for lung cancer patients aged 80-89 compared with those aged 50-59 was 0.52 (0.46 to 0.59). Conclusions Despite the implementation of the NHS Cancer Plan, social factors still strongly influence access to and the provision of care.

Indexed as

AgedBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsEmergency Service, HospitalEnglandEpidemiologic MethodsFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHospitalizationHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID20075152
PMCPMC2806941
OpenAlexW2019094023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.