Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24637955›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2014

Racial differences in cancer screening with electronic health records and electronic preventive care reminders.

Rebecca G Mishuris, Jeffrey A Linder

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Screen to Save: Results from NCI's Colorectal Cancer Outreach and Screening Initiative to Promote Awareness and Knowledge of Colorectal Cancer in Racial/Ethnic and Rural Populations.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020
    Observational
  4. Oncology Information System: A Qualitative Study of Users' Requirements.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Multilevel Intervention Raises Latina Participation in Mammography Screening: Findings from ¡Fortaleza Latina!Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2016
    Article
  8. Patient and provider characteristics associated with colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening among Asian Americans.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2014
    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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rebecca G MishurisDivision of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Jeffrey A LinderDivision of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USHarvard University · US

Funding

PHS HHS T32 HP10251
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth information technology (HIT) can increase preventive care. There are hopes and fears about the impact of HIT on racial disparities in cancer screening.

objectiveTo determine whether electronic health records (EHRs) or electronic preventive care reminders (e-reminders) modify racial differences in cancer screening order rates.

designUsing the 2006-2010 National Ambulatory and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys, we measured (1) visit-based differences in rates of age-appropriate breast, cervical and colon cancer screening orders between white and non-white subjects at primary care visits with and without EHRs, and, at visits with EHRs, with and without e-reminders, and (2) whether EHRs or e-reminders modified these differences. MAIN OUTCOMES: Mammography (N=45,380); Pap smears (N=73,348); and sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy (N=50,955) orders.

resultsAmong an estimated 2.4 billion US adult primary care visits, orders for screening for breast, cervical or colon cancer did not differ between clinics with and without EHRs or e-reminders. There was no difference in screening orders between non-white and white patients for breast (aOR=1.1; 95% CI 0.9 to 1.4) or cervical cancer (aOR=1.2; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.3). For colon cancer, non-white patients were more likely to receive screening orders than white patients overall (aOR=1.5; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0), at visits with EHRs (aOR=1.8; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.8) and at visits with e-reminders (aOR=2.1; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.7). EHRs or e-reminders did not modify racial differences in cancer screening rates.

conclusionsIn this visit-based analysis, non-white patients had higher colon cancer screening order rates than white patients. Despite hopes and fears about HIT, EHRs and e-reminders did not ameliorate or exacerbate racial differences in cancer screening order rates.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsReminder SystemsAdultAmbulatory CareBreast NeoplasmsColonic NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHealth PromotionHumansRacial GroupsRetrospective StudiesUterine Cervical Neoplasmscancer screeningelectronic health recordsmeaningful usequality of careracial disparities

Identifiers

PMID24637955
PMCPMC4173177
OpenAlexW2168886390

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.