ArticleCancer research and treatment2018
Patterns of Rectal Cancer Radiotherapy Adopting Evidence-Based Medicine: An Analysis of the National Database from 2005 to 2016.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Controversies and Perspectives in the Current Management of Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer-A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Lymph node regression grading of locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2022Review
- Association of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, radiotherapy fractionation/technique, and risk of development of distant metastasis among patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2022Article
- The prognostic impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on lymph node sampling in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.Updates in surgery · 2020Observational
- CCR6 Is a Predicting Biomarker of Radiosensitivity and Potential Target of Radiosensitization in Rectal Cancer.Cancer research and treatment · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNot many studies have evaluated the adoption and dissemination of evidence-based medicine in rectal cancer radiotherapy (RT). We aimed to analyze the differences by institutional characteristics and geography in adopting evidence-based care for rectal cancer RT and factors affecting the adoption in Korea. MATERIALS AND
methodsKorean National Health Insurance Service claims database was used. All rectal cancer patients treated with radical surgery and adjuvant RT at the same institution in 2005-2016 were included in this study. RT within 3 months before and after surgery was regarded as preoperative and postoperative RT, respectively.
resultsA total of 16,827 patients treated in 83 institutions were included in the analysis. The use of preoperative RT has substantially increased over time, from 40.6% in 2005 to 84.2% in 2016 all over the nation. The proportion of preoperative RT (54.8%) exceeded that of postoperative RT (45.2%) in 2006. However, a wide range of institutional and regional variation was observed. Compared to high-volume institutions, low-volume institutions showed late adoption and variable dissemination patterns of preoperative RT. Busan-Ulsan-Gyeongsangnam-do and Gangwon-do showed slower adoption and less use of preoperative RT than other region.
conclusionWe demonstrated gradual and steady increase in adoption of preoperative RT in rectal cancer treatment nationally from 2005 to 2016. Institutional variations between high- and low-volume institutions were observed.
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.