ArticlePloS one2014
Individual- and neighborhood-level predictors of mortality in Florida colorectal cancer patients.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mortality rate and predictors of colorectal cancer patients in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Social determinants of colorectal cancer risk, stage, and survival: a systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2020Pooled it
- Environmental Levels of Volatile Organic Compounds, Race, and Socioeconomic Markers Correlate with Areas of High Colorectal Cancer Incidence.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Outcomes for Medicaid Patients with Colorectal Cancer Are Improved in Affluent Neighborhoods, but Disparities Persist.Cancers · 2025Article
- Enhanced spatial analysis assessing the association between PFAS-contaminated water and cancer incidence: rationale, study design, and methods.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Risk prediction of advanced colorectal neoplasia varies by race and neighbourhood socioeconomic status.Family medicine and community health · 2024Article
- The impact of socioeconomic status on survival in stage III colon cancer patients: A retrospective cohort study using the SEER census-tract dataset.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Effect of Neighborhood and Individual-Level Socioeconomic Factors on Colorectal Cancer Screening Adherence.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Variable selection in social-environmental data: sparse regression and tree ensemble machine learning approaches.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Survival Status and Predictors of Mortality Among Colorectal Cancer Patients in Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: A Retrospective Followup Study.Journal of cancer prevention · 2020Article
- The effect of neighborhood social environment on prostate cancer development in black and white men at high risk for prostate cancer.PloS one · 2020Article
- Combining Nonclinical Determinants of Health and Clinical Data for Research and Evaluation: Rapid Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2019Review
- Roles ofJournal of genetics · 2018Article
- Age-Specific Risk Factors for Advanced Stage Colorectal Cancer, 1981-2013.Preventing chronic disease · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe examined individual-level and neighborhood-level predictors of mortality in CRC patients diagnosed in Florida to identify high-risk groups for targeted interventions.
methodsDemographic and clinical data from the Florida Cancer Data System registry (2007-2011) were linked with Agency for Health Care Administration and US Census data (n = 47,872). Cox hazard regression models were fitted with candidate predictors of CRC survival and stratified by age group (18-49, 50-64, 65+).
resultsStratified by age group, higher mortality risk per comorbidity was found among youngest (21%), followed by middle (19%), and then oldest (14%) age groups. The two younger age groups had higher mortality risk with proximal compared to those with distal cancer. Compared with private insurance, those in the middle age group were at higher death risk if not insured (HR = 1.35), or received healthcare through Medicare (HR = 1.44), Medicaid (HR = 1.53), or the Veteran's Administration (HR = 1.26). Only Medicaid in the youngest (52% higher risk) and those not insured in the oldest group (24% lower risk) were significantly different from their privately insured counterparts. Among 18-49 and 50-64 age groups there was a higher mortality risk among the lowest SES (1.17- and 1.23-fold higher in the middle age and 1.12- and 1.17-fold higher in the older age group, respectively) compared to highest SES. Married patients were significantly better off than divorced/separated (HR = 1.22), single (HR = 1.29), or widowed (HR = 1.19) patients.
conclusionFactors associated with increased risk for mortality among individuals with CRC included being older, uninsured, unmarried, more comorbidities, living in lower SES neighborhoods, and diagnosed at later disease stage. Higher risk among younger patients was attributed to proximal cancer site, Medicaid, and distant disease; however, lower SES and being unmarried were not risk factors in this age group. Targeted interventions to improve survivorship and greater social support while considering age classification may assist these high-risk groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.