Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25182047›Full record

ArticleThorax2015

The impact of the 'hub and spoke' model of care for lung cancer and equitable access to surgery.

Aamir Khakwani, Anna L Rich, Helen A Powell, Laila J Tata, Rosamund A Stanley, David R Baldwin, John P Duffy, Richard B Hubbard

Abstract 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 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Recent advances in liver transplantation.Frontline gastroenterology · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Recent advances in the management of lung cancer.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2018
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Aamir KhakwaniDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Anna L RichDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK.
Helen A PowellDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK Nottingham Respiratory Research Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Laila J TataDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Rosamund A StanleyFalls and Fragility Audit Programme Manager Clinical Effectiveness and Evaluation Unit, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK.
David R BaldwinDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK.
John P DuffyDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK.
Richard B HubbardDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK Nottingham Respiratory Research Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the influence of where a patient is first seen (either surgical or non-surgical centre) and patient features on having surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

designCross-sectional study from individual patients, between 1January 2008 and 31March 2012.

settingLinked National Lung Cancer Audit and Hospital Episode Statistics datasets.

participants95,818 English patients with a diagnosis of NSCLC, of whom 12,759 (13%) underwent surgical resection.

main outcome measureOdds of having surgery based on the empirical catchment population of the 30 thoracic surgical centres in England and whether the patient is first seen in a surgical centre or a non-surgical centre.

resultsPatients were more likely to be operated on if they were first seen at a surgical centre (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.29 to 1.45). This was most marked for surgical centres with the largest catchment populations. In these surgical centres with large catchment populations, the resection rate for local patients was 18% and for patients first seen in a non-surgical centre within catchment was 12%.

conclusionsSurgical centres that serve the largest catchment populations have high resection rates for patients first seen in their own centre but, in contrast, low resection rates for patients first seen at the surrounding centres they serve. Our findings demonstrate the importance of going further than relating resection rates to hospital volume or surgeon number, and show that there is a pressing need to design lung cancer services which enable all patients, including those first seen at non-surgical centres, to have equal access to lung cancer surgery.

Indexed as

Thoracic SurgeryAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCatchment Area, HealthCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHospitals, SpecialHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedModels, OrganizationalLung CancerNon-Small Cell Lung CancerThoracic Surgery

Identifiers

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.