Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24923873›Full record

ArticleThorax2015

The role of receipt and timeliness of treatment in socioeconomic inequalities in lung cancer survival: population-based, data-linkage study.

Lynne F Forrest, Jean Adams, Greg Rubin, Martin White

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Thorax, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. How long is too long? A scoping review of health system delays in lung cancer.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2018
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lynne F ForrestFuse, UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jean AdamsFuse, UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Greg RubinFuse, UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Wolfson Research Institute, Durham University, Queen's Campus, Stockton on Tees, UK.
Martin WhiteFuse, UKCRC Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Newcastle University · GBUnited Kingdom Clinical Research Collaboration · GB

Funding

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKDepartment of HealthMedical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLung cancer survival is socioeconomically patterned, and socioeconomic inequalities in receipt of treatment have been demonstrated. In England, there are target waiting times for the referral (14 days) and treatment intervals (31 days from diagnosis, 62 days from GP referral). Socioeconomic inequalities in the time intervals from GP referral have been found. Cancer registry, Hospital Episode Statistics and lung cancer audit data were linked in order to investigate the contribution of these inequalities to socioeconomic inequalities in lung cancer survival.

methodsLogistic regression was used to examine the likelihood of being alive 2 years after diagnosis, by socioeconomic position, for 22,967 lung cancer patients diagnosed in 2006-2009, and in a subset with stage recorded (n=5233).

resultsSocioeconomic inequalities in survival were found in a multivariable analysis adjusted for age, sex, histology, year, timely GP referral, performance status and comorbidity, with those in the most deprived socioeconomic group significantly less likely to be alive after 2 years (OR=0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.88, p<0.001). When receipt of treatment was included in the analysis, the association no longer remained significant (OR=0.87, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.00, p=0.06). Addition of timeliness of treatment did not alter the conclusion. Patients treated within guideline targets had lower likelihood of two-year survival.

conclusionsSocioeconomic inequalities in survival from lung cancer were statistically explained by socioeconomic inequalities in receipt of treatment, but not by timeliness of referral and treatment. Further research is required to determine the currently unexplained socioeconomic variance in treatment rates.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesSocial ClassAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungEnglandFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicReferral and ConsultationSmall Cell Lung CarcinomaSocioeconomic FactorsClinical EpidemiologyLung CancerNon-Small Cell Lung CancerSmall Cell Lung Cancer

Identifiers

PMID24923873
OpenAlexW2090071914

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.