Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24866103›Full record

ArticleCancer2014

The relationship between area poverty rate and site-specific cancer incidence in the United States.

Francis P Boscoe, Christopher J Johnson, Recinda L Sherman, David G Stinchcomb, Ge Lin, Kevin A Henry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

63 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Francis P BoscoeNew York State Cancer Registry, Albany, New York.
Christopher J Johnson
Recinda L Sherman
David G Stinchcomb
Ge Lin
Kevin A Henry

Funding

NEW YORK STATE CANCER PREVENTION & CONTROL PROGRAMU58DP003879 · DP · NYSDOH/HEALTH RESEARCH, INC. · PI WALLACE, BARBARA J · 2012 to 2014
$37.6M
NATIONAL CANCER PREVENTION AND CONTROL PROGRAMU58DP000844 · DP · FLORIDA STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH · PI WOOD, BETSY M. · 2007 to 2011
$34.4M
NE CANCER PREVENTION & CONTROL PROGRAMU58DP003928 · DP · NEBRASKA ST DEPT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVS · PI EUREK, PAULA · 2012 to 2014
$10.4M
IDAHO APPLICATION FOR NATIONAL PROGRAM OF CANCER REGISTRIES (NPCR)U58DP003882 · DP · IDAHO HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION · PI CARSON, STACEY L · 2012 to 2014
$798k
NCCDPHP CDC HHS 1-U58-DP003879NCCDPHP CDC HHS 1-U58-DP003882NCCDPHP CDC HHS 1-U58-DP003928NCCDPHP CDC HHS U58-DP000844
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe relationship between socioeconomic status and cancer incidence in the United States has not traditionally been a focus of population-based cancer surveillance systems.

methodsNearly 3 million tumors diagnosed between 2005 and 2009 from 16 states plus Los Angeles were assigned into 1 of 4 groupings based on the poverty rate of the residential census tract at time of diagnosis. The sex-specific risk ratio of the highest-to-lowest poverty category was measured using Poisson regression, adjusting for age and race, for 39 cancer sites.

resultsFor all sites combined, there was a negligible association between cancer incidence and poverty; however, 32 of 39 cancer sites showed a significant association with poverty (14 positively associated and 18 negatively associated). Nineteen of these sites had monotonic increases or decreases in risk across all 4 poverty categories. The sites most strongly associated with higher poverty were Kaposi sarcoma, larynx, cervix, penis, and liver; those most strongly associated with lower poverty were melanoma, thyroid, other nonepithelial skin, and testis. Sites associated with higher poverty had lower incidence and higher mortality than those associated with lower poverty.

conclusionsThese findings demonstrate the importance and relevance of including a measure of socioeconomic status in national cancer surveillance. Cancer 2014;120:2191-2198. © 2014 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.

Indexed as

Poverty AreasSocial ClassHumansIncidenceNeoplasmsOdds RatioPoisson DistributionRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSEER ProgramSex FactorsUnited Stateshealth disparitiesincidencepovertysocioeconomic statussurveillance

Identifiers

PMID24866103
PMCPMC4232004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.