Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25751798›Full record

ArticleDiseases of the colon and rectum2015

Does patient rurality predict quality colon cancer care?: A population-based study.

Christopher J Chow, Waddah B Al-Refaie, Anasooya Abraham, Abraham Markin, Wei Zhong, David A Rothenberger, Mary R Kwaan, Elizabeth B Habermann

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diseases of the colon and rectum, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Colorectal cancer survival disparities in persistent poverty areas.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher J Chow1 Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 2 Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital and Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer, Washington, District of Columbia 3 Genentech, South San Francisco, California 4 Division of Health Care Policy and Research and Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Waddah B Al-Refaie
Anasooya Abraham
Abraham Markin
Wei Zhong
David A Rothenberger
Mary R Kwaan
Elizabeth B Habermann
University of Minnesota · USGeorgetown University · USMayo Clinic · US

Funding

Surgical Oncology Research Training ProgramT32CA132715 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI VICKERS, SELWYN M · 2008 to 2012
$912k
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA132715NCI NIH HHS T32CA132715
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore than 50 million people reside in rural America. However, the impact of patient rurality on colon cancer care has been incompletely characterized, despite its known impact on screening.

objectiveOur study sought to examine the impact of patient rurality on quality and comprehensive colon cancer care.

designWe constructed a retrospective cohort of 123,129 patients with stage 0 to IV colon cancer. Rural residence was established based on the patient medical service study area designated by the registry. SETTINGS: The study was conducted using the 1996-2008 California Cancer Registry. PATIENTS: All of the patients diagnosed between 1996 and 2008 with tumors located in the colon were eligible for inclusion in this study.

main outcome measuresBaseline characteristics were compared by rurality status. Multivariate regression models then were used to examine the impact of rurality on stage in the entire cohort, adequate lymphadenectomy in stage I to III disease, and receipt of chemotherapy for stage III disease. Proportional-hazards regression was used to examine the impact of rurality on cancer-specific survival.

resultsOf all of the patients diagnosed with colon cancer, 18,735 (15%) resided in rural areas. Our multivariate models demonstrate that rurality was associated with later stage of diagnosis, inadequate lymphadenectomy in stage I to III disease, and lower likelihood of receiving chemotherapy for stage III disease. In addition, rurality was associated with worse cancer-specific survival. LIMITATIONS: We could not account for socioeconomic status directly, although we used insurance status as a surrogate. Furthermore, we did not have access to treatment location or distance traveled. We also could not account for provider or hospital case volume, patient comorbidities, or complications.

conclusionsA significant portion of patients treated for colon cancer live in rural areas. Yet, rural residence is associated with modest differences in stage, adherence to quality measures, and survival. Future endeavors should help improve care to this vulnerable population (see video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A143).

Indexed as

AdultAgedCaliforniaCohort StudiesColonic NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsQuality of Health CareRetrospective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID25751798
PMCPMC4356018
OpenAlexW2315712429

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.