ArticleBMC public health2020
Rural-urban differences in the association between individual, facility, and clinical characteristics and travel time for cancer treatment.
Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Fertility preservation access among female adolescents and young adults with cancer: A systematic review.Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Understanding financial toxicity in cancer care through a social-ecological lens.Current opinion in oncology · 2026Review
- Geographical accessibility of cancer hospital using geospatial technology in Bagmati province, Nepal.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A descriptive study of cancer care experiences and burden of rural South Dakotans.Palliative care and social practice · 2026Article
- Article
- Geographical Discrepancy in Medical Care Access Among Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults With Cancer in Japan, 2016-2019.Cancer science · 2025Article
- "I'm learning to live after cancer and its treatment": Exploring the challenges of cancer survivorship in Arkansas.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2025Article
- Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cardio-Oncology Care.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- The intersecting time, administrative, and financial burdens of a cancer diagnosis.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Lung cancer disparities in rural, persistent poverty counties: a secondary data analysis.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Disparities in time to treatment initiation of invasive lung cancer among Black and White patients in Tennessee.PloS one · 2025Article
- Consuming Patients' Days: Time Spent on Ambulatory Appointments by People With Cancer.The oncologist · 2024Article
- Reporting time toxicity in prospective cancer clinical trials: A scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Examining the roles of travel distance, medical mistrust, and cancer fatalism in the uptake of clinical cancer prevention among women in rural and urban US communities: A secondary data analysis.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Urban-Rural Differences in Receipt of Cancer Surgery at High-Volume Hospitals and Sensitivity to Hospital Volume Thresholds.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
- Cancer Treatment Closer to the Patient Reduces Travel Burden, Time Toxicity, and Improves Patient Satisfaction, Results of 546 Consecutive Patients in a Northern Italian District.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Role of neighborhood context in ovarian cancer survival disparities: current research and future directions.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Review
- Market competition influences practice patterns in management of patients with intermittent claudication in the vascular quality initiative.Journal of vascular surgery · 2023Article
- Trends of travel burdens to access cancer care among children with cancer: analysis of a population-based cancer registry data in Aichi, Japan.Nagoya journal of medical science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGreater travel time to cancer care has been identified as a potential barrier to care as well as associated with worse health outcomes. While rural cancer patients have been shown to travel farther for care, it is not known what patient, facility, and clinical characteristics may differentially be associated with greater roundtrip travel times for cancer patients by rurality of residence. Identifying these factors will help providers understand which patients may be most in need of resources to assist with travel.
methodsUsing 2010-2014 Pennsylvania Cancer Registry data, we examined the association between patient, facility, and clinical characteristics with roundtrip patient travel time using multivariate linear regression models. We then estimated separate models by rural residence based on the Rural-Urban Continuum Code (RUCC) of a patient's county of residence at diagnosis to understand how the association of each factor with travel time may vary for patients separated into metro residents (RUCC 1-3); and two categories of non-metro residents (RUCC 4-6) and (RUCC 7-9).
resultsIn our sample (n = 197,498), we document large differences in mean roundtrip travel time-mean 41.5 min for RUCC 1-3 patients vs. 128.9 min for RUCC 7-9 patients. We show cervical/uterine and ovarian cancer patients travel significantly farther; as do patients traveling to higher volume and higher-ranked hospitals.
conclusionsTo better understand patient travel burden, providers need to understand that factors predicting longer travel time may vary by rurality of patient residence and cancer type.
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.