Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32390103›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2020

Beyond broadband: digital inclusion as a driver of inequities in access to rural cancer care.

Pam Baker DeGuzman, Veronica Bernacchi, C Allen Cupp, Brian Dunn, B J Ferrebee Ghamandi, Ivora D Hinton, Mark J Jameson, Debra Lynn Lewandowski, Christi Sheffield

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The role of digital health technology in rural cancer care delivery: A systematic review.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pam Baker DeGuzmanUniversity of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, VA, USA. deguzman@virginia.edu.
Veronica BernacchiUniversity of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
C Allen CuppUniversity of Virginia Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Brian DunnUniversity of Virginia Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
B J Ferrebee GhamandiDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Ivora D HintonUniversity of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Mark J JamesonUniversity of Virginia Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Debra Lynn LewandowskiUniversity of Virginia Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Christi SheffieldUniversity of Virginia Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
University of Virginia · USUniversity of Virginia Cancer Center

Funding

Women's Oncology Program - WONP30CA044579 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE · PI Thomas P. Loughran · 1987 to 2026
$72.1M
National Cancer Institute grant administered through University of Virginia Cancer Center P30CA044579
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRural cancer survivors have worse quality of life than their urban counterparts. Telemedicine is a potential solution to connecting rural residents with specialized cancer providers during the survivorship period, but limitations in broadband may stifle the impact. Using data from a feasibility study evaluating a telemedicine intervention aimed at connecting rural Virginia cancer survivors with their care team located at a cancer center associated with an academic medical center, we sought to evaluate the ability of rural survivors to access the intervention and suggest strategies for improving access to rural cancer survivorship care.

methodsWe used a descriptive design with geospatial and quantitative methods to understand broadband access, driving time to a satellite telemedicine site, and ability to utilize a borrowed cellular-enabled tablet to participate in the intervention for cancer survivors living in Central Virginia.

resultsOur study participants resided in census tracts where an average of 58% of households have adequate broadband access necessary to support a telemedicine videoconferencing intervention. Average driving time to the nearest telemedicine site was 29.6 min. Those who utilized the borrowed tablet experienced considerable difficulty with utilizing the technology.

conclusionsRural cancer populations do not have equal access to a cancer survivorship telemedicine intervention. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Telemedicine interventions aimed at connecting cancer survivors with their academic medical center-based cancer providers may be ineffective if survivors do not have access to either fixed broadband or a satellite clinic. Future research needs to evaluate other sites from which rural survivors can connect, such as rural public libraries.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCancer SurvivorsDigital DivideFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInternet AccessMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsQuality of LifeRural PopulationSurvivorshipAccess to careBroadband accessCancer survivorshipRural populationsTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID32390103
OpenAlexW3023762812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.