Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32043078›Full record

ArticleAnnals of cancer epidemiology2019

Sociodemographic disparities in access to ovarian cancer treatment.

Shannon Graham, Elaine Hallisey, Grete Wilt, Barry Flanagan, Juan L Rodriguez, Lucy Peipins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of cancer epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The KPROCS Study: A Real-World and Research Resource to Investigate Multilevel Determinants of Ovarian Cancer Treatment and Survival.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Healthcare Access Domains Mediate Racial Disparities in Ovarian Cancer Treatment Quality in a US Patient Cohort: A Structural Equation Modelling Analysis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Shannon GrahamAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Elaine HalliseyAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Grete WiltAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Barry FlanaganAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Juan L RodriguezCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Lucy PeipinsCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOvarian cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death among women in the United States. Failure to receive optimal treatment and poorer survival rates have been reported for older women, African-American women, women with low income, and women with public health insurance coverage or no coverage. Additionally, regional differences in geographic access influence the type of treatment women may seek. This paper explores geographic accessibility and sociodemographic vulnerability in Georgia, which influence receipt of optimal ovarian cancer treatment.

methodsAn enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA), defining physical access, was created for each census tract and gynecologic oncologist clinic. Secondly, sociodemographic variables reflecting potential social vulnerability were selected from U.S. Census and American Community Survey data at the tract level. These two measures were combined to create a measure of Geosocial Vulnerability. This framework was tested using Georgia ovarian cancer mortality records.

resultsGeospatial access was higher in urban areas with less accessibility in suburban and rural areas. Sociodemographic vulnerability varied geospatially, with higher vulnerability in urban citers and rural areas. Sociodemographic measures were combined with geospatial access to create a Geosocial Vulnerability Indicator, which showed a significant positive association with ovarian cancer mortality.

conclusionsSpatial and sociodemographic measures pinpointed areas of healthcare access vulnerability not revealed by either spatial analysis or sociodemographic assessment alone. Whereas lower healthcare accessibility in rural areas has been well described, our analysis shows considerable heterogeneity in access to care in urban areas where the disadvantaged census tracts can be easily identified.

Indexed as

Geographic Information Systemsgeosocial vulnerabilityOvarian cancersocial vulnerabilitytwo-step floating catchment area

Identifiers

PMID32043078
PMCPMC7008774

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.