ArticleCMAJ open
Small-area variation in screening for cancer, glucose and cholesterol in Ontario: a cross-sectional study.
Article in CMAJ open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of the BETTER intervention for chronic disease prevention and screening by public health nurses in low income neighbourhoods: views of community residents.BMC health services research · 2024Trial
- Building on existing tools to improve chronic disease prevention and screening in public health: a cluster randomized trial.BMC public health · 2021Trial
- BETTER HEALTH: Durham -- protocol for a cluster randomized trial of BETTER in community and public health settings.BMC public health · 2017Trial
- Assessing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Emergency Department Use for Patients Undergoing Cancer-Directed Surgeries.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Association of community socioeconomic deprivation with evidence of reduced kidney function at time of type 2 diabetes diagnosis.SSM - population health · 2021Article
- Lung Cancer Inequalities in Stage of Diagnosis in Ontario, Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- A "Tea and Cookies" Approach: Co-designing Cancer Screening Interventions with Patients Living with Low Income.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- Preventive care among primary care patients living with spinal cord injury.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2019Article
- Area-level income disparities in colorectal screening in Canada: evidence to inform future surveillance.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2019Article
- Association Between Adherence to Cancer Screening and Knowledge of Screening Guidelines: Feasibility Study Linking Self-Reported Survey Data With Medical Records.JMIR cancer · 2018Article
- Cancer Screening Among Patients Who Self-Identify as Muslim: Combining Self-Reported Data with Medical Records in a Family Practice Setting.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2018Article
- Using self-reported data on the social determinants of health in primary care to identify cancer screening disparities: opportunities and challenges.BMC family practice · 2017Article
- Lay health educators within primary care practices to improve cancer screening uptake for South Asian patients: challenges in quality improvement.Patient preference and adherence · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScreening for cervical, breast and colon cancers, and elevations of cholesterol and glucose, reduces premature cause-specific mortality from these cancers and circulatory diseases. Despite primary care reforms and incentives, and promotion of cancer-screening programs among individuals, participation is suboptimal. We aimed to examine participation as of Dec. 31, 2011, by factors of deprivation, demographics and primary care at the small-area level.
methodsFrom health care administrative databases, we identified people eligible for each screening test, and their participation, in each dissemination area (referred to as small areas, n = 18 950) in Ontario. We calculated rates for each test among small areas (overall and stratified by demographic, socioeconomic and primary care descriptors) and stratified by sex for all tests combined. We loaded all data into a geographic information system. Funnel plots were generated showing the percentage of eligible people who completed screening for all tests by small area, stratified by sex. Overall and stratified screening prevalence ratios were calculated among small areas.
resultsAmong small areas, the mean and SD for participation in all tests combined was 31.6% (SD 11.0%) for women and 41.2% (SD 12.0%) for men. Screening prevalence among small areas, for each test and for all tests combined, overall and stratified by sex, declined with decreasing percentage with high school completion, decreasing socioeconomic quintile, and decreasing percentage with an identifiable primary care physician.
interpretationOur results show that the rate of participation in all eligible screening tests among small areas is much lower than the rate of participation in any one particular test. This finding has implications for the design and implementation of strategies to improve rates of screening.
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.