Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30442384›Full record

ArticleGynecologic oncology2019

Evaluating the urban-rural paradox: The complicated relationship between distance and the receipt of guideline-concordant care among cervical cancer patients.

Lisa P Spees, Stephanie B Wheeler, Mahesh Varia, Morris Weinberger, Christopher D Baggett, Xi Zhou, Victoria M Petermann, Wendy R Brewster

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Role of Rurality, Travel Time, and Neighborhood Socioeconomics on Patterns of Adjuvant Therapy Receipt among Patients with Endometrial Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Financial toxicity in patients with glioblastoma.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Perspectives of cancer prevention and control resources from stakeholders in rural southern Illinois.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2022
    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 1 institution in 1 country.

Lisa P SpeesThe Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America. Electronic address: lspees21@live.unc.edu.
Stephanie B WheelerDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America.
Mahesh VariaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America.
Morris WeinbergerDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America.
Christopher D BaggettLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America; Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America.
Xi ZhouLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America.
Victoria M PetermannSchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America.
Wendy R BrewsterLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America; Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America; Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States of America.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Re-Entry Supplement: Investigation of Oral Microbial Enzymes for the Detection and Treatment of Periodontal DiseaseUL1TR002489 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, SHAHEEN, NICHOLAS J · 2018 to 2022
$48.6M
UNC-CH TRAINING PROGRAM IN HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCHT32HS000032 · AHRQ · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HOLMES, GEORGE M · 1989 to 2024
$8.2M
Cancer Care Quality Training ProgramT32CA116339 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ETHAN M. BASCH, Stephanie Brooke Wheeler · 2018 to 2026
$3.0M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS000032NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002489NCI NIH HHS T32 CA116339
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveUrban-rural health disparities are often attributed to the longer distances rural patients travel to receive care. However, a recent study suggests that distance to care may affect urban and rural cancer patients differentially. We examined whether this urban-rural paradox exists among patients with cervical cancer.

methodsWe identified individuals diagnosed with cervical cancer from 2004 to 2013 using a statewide cancer registry linked to multi-payer, insurance claims. Our primary outcome was receipt of guideline-concordant care: surgery for stages IA1-IB1; external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), concomitant chemotherapy, and brachytherapy for stages IB2-IVA. We estimated risk ratios (RR) using modified Poisson regressions, stratified by urban/rural location, to examine the association between distance to nearest facility and receipt of treatment.

results62% of 999 cervical cancer patients received guideline-concordant care. The association between distance and receipt of care differed by type of treatment. In urban areas, cancer patients who lived ≥15 miles from the nearest surgical facility were less likely to receive primary surgical management compared to those <5 miles from the nearest surgical facility (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.60-0.98). In rural areas, patients living ≥15 miles from the nearest brachytherapy facility were more likely to receive treatment compared to those <5 miles from the nearest brachytherapy facility (RR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.14-2.58). Distance was not associated with the receipt of chemotherapy or EBRT.

conclusionsAmong cervical cancer patients, there is evidence supporting the urban-rural paradox, i.e., geographic distance to cancer care facilities is not consistently associated with treatment receipt in expected or consistent ways. Healthcare systems must consider the diverse and differential barriers encountered by urban and rural residents to improve access to high quality cancer care.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicRural HealthUrban HealthUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCervical cancer patientsDisparitiesDistance to careGuideline-concordant careUrban/rural

Identifiers

PMID30442384
PMCPMC6321781
OpenAlexW2901166351

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.