ArticleBMJ open2019
Contributions of prognostic factors to socioeconomic disparities in cancer survival: protocol for analysis of a cohort with linked data.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Racial and ethnic disparities in the cause of death for clear cell renal cell carcinoma.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Racial/ethnic disparities in the cause of death among patients with prostate cancer in the United States from 1995 to 2019: a population-based retrospective cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic disparities in colorectal cancer survival: contributions of prognostic factors in a large Australian cohort.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSocioeconomic disparities in cancer survival have been reported in many developed countries, including Australia. Although some international studies have investigated the determinants of these socioeconomic disparities, most previous Australian studies have been descriptive, as only limited relevant data are generally available. Here, we describe a protocol for a study to use data from a large-scale Australian cohort linked with several other health-related databases to investigate several groups of factors associated with socioeconomic disparities in cancer survival in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, and quantify their contributions to the survival disparities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study participants completed a baseline questionnaire during 2006-2009. Those who were subsequently diagnosed with cancer of the colon, rectum, lung or female breast will be included. This study sample will be identified by linkage with NSW Cancer Registry data for 2006-2013, and their vital status will be determined by linking with cause of death records up to 31 December 2015. The study cohort will be divided into four groups based on each of the individual education level and an area-based socioeconomic measure. The treatment received will be obtained through linking with hospital records and Medicare and pharmaceutical claims data. Cox proportional hazards models will be fitted sequentially to estimate the percentage contributions to overall socioeconomic survival disparities of patient factors, tumour and diagnosis factors, and treatment variables. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research is covered by ethical approval from the NSW Population and Health Services Research Ethics Committee. Results of the study will be disseminated to different interest groups and organisations through scientific conferences, social media and peer-reviewed articles.
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.