ArticleCancer2017
Relation of comorbidities and patient navigation with the time to diagnostic resolution after abnormal cancer screening.
Article in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient navigation programmes for symptomatic lung cancer patients: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Pooled it
- The role of health, sociodemographic, and care delivery factors in timely completion of colonoscopy in a US-based primary care population: a retrospective analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Association of Neighborhood Social Vulnerability With Metastatic Cancer at Diagnosis.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Assessment of patient navigation programs for breast cancer patients across the city of Boston.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- Interventions to improve early cancer diagnosis of symptomatic individuals: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices in a Midwest Urban Safety-Net Healthcare System.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2021Article
- Nurse Navigators' Views on Patient and System Factors Associated with Navigation Needs among Women with Breast Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Translating research into practice: Protocol for a community-engaged, stepped wedge randomized trial to reduce disparities in breast cancer treatment through a regional patient navigation collaborative.Contemporary clinical trials · 2020Article
- Evolution of a longitudinal, multidisciplinary, and scalable patient navigation matrix model.Cancer medicine · 2020Review
- Prostate cancer navigation: initial experience and association with time to care.World journal of urology · 2019Article
- Time to initial cancer treatment in the United States and association with survival over time: An observational study.PloS one · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhether patient navigation improves outcomes for patients with comorbidities is unknown. The aims of this study were to determine the effect of comorbidities on the time to diagnostic resolution after an abnormal cancer screening test and to examine whether patient navigation improves the timeliness and likelihood of diagnostic resolution for patients with comorbidities in comparison with no navigation.
methodsA secondary analysis of comorbidity data collected by Patient Navigation Research Program sites using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was conducted. The participants were 6,349 patients with abnormal breast, cervical, colon, or prostate cancer screening tests between 2007 and 2011. The intervention was patient navigation or usual care. The CCI data were highly skewed across projects and cancer sites, and the CCI scores were categorized as 0 (CCI score of 0 or no comorbidities identified; 76% of cases); 1 (CCI score of 1; 16% of cases), or 2 (CCI score ≥ 2; 8% of cases). Separate adjusted hazard ratios for each site and cancer type were obtained, and then they were pooled with a meta-analysis random effects methodology.
resultsPatients with a CCI score ≥ 2 had delayed diagnostic resolution after an abnormal cancer screening test in comparison with those with no comorbidities. Patient navigation reduced delays in diagnostic resolution, with the greatest benefits seen for those with a CCI score ≥ 2.
conclusionsPersons with a CCI score ≥ 2 experienced significant delays in timely diagnostic care in comparison with patients without comorbidities. Patient navigation was effective in reducing delays in diagnostic resolution among those with CCI scores > 1. Cancer 2017;123:312-318. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
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.