Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26380179›Full record

ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2015

Lung cancer care: the impact of facilities and area measures.

Christopher S Lathan

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Disparities in Lung Cancer Treatment.Current oncology reports · 2022
    Review
  4. Exceptional Survival Among Kentucky Stage IV Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: Appalachian Versus Non-Appalachian Populations.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2022
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Vinculin expression in non-small cell lung cancer.The Journal of international medical research · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Racial and Ethnic Differences in the Relationship between Aspirin Use and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Risk and Survival.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Lung cancer health disparities.Carcinogenesis · 2018
    Review
  15. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christopher S LathanMcGraw/Patterson Center for Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer related mortality in the US, and while treatment disparities by race and class have been well described in the literature, the impact of social determinates of health, and specific characteristics of the treatment centers have been less well characterized. As the treatment of lung cancer relies more upon a precision and personalized medicine approach, where patients obtain treatment has an impact on outcomes and could be a major factor in treatment disparities. The purpose of this manuscript is to discuss the manner in which lung cancer care can be impacted by poor access to high quality treatment centers, and how the built environment can be a mitigating factor in the pursuit of treatment equity.

Indexed as

Disparitieslung cancersocial determinates of health

Identifiers

PMID26380179
PMCPMC4549476
OpenAlexW2209911202

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.