Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32931490›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Cancer stage at presentation for incarcerated patients at a single urban tertiary care center.

Kathryn I Sunthankar, Kevin N Griffith, Stephanie D Talutis, Amy K Rosen, David B McAneny, Matthew H Kulke, Jennifer F Tseng, Teviah E Sachs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Lung Cancer Screening in the Incarcerated Population Through a Community Imaging Partnership.Journal of correctional health care : the official journal of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kathryn I SunthankarDepartment of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3162-1769
Kevin N GriffithBoston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Stephanie D TalutisBoston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Amy K RosenCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, United States of America.
David B McAnenyBoston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Matthew H KulkeBoston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Jennifer F TsengBoston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Teviah E SachsBoston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Boston University · USVA Boston Healthcare System · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

AHRQ HHS R36 HS027306
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients who are incarcerated are a vulnerable patient population and may suffer from less access to routine cancer screenings compared to their non-incarcerated counterparts. Therefore, a thorough evaluation of potential differences in cancer diagnosis staging is needed. We sought to examine whether there are differences in cancer stage at initial diagnosis between non-incarcerated and incarcerated patients by pursuing a retrospective chart review from 2010-2017 for all patients who were newly diagnosed with cancer at an urban safety net hospital. Incarceration status was determined by insurance status. Our primary outcome was incarceration status at time of initial cancer diagnosis. Overall, patients who were incarcerated presented at a later cancer stage for all cancer types compared to the non-incarcerated (+.14 T stage, p = .033; +.23 N stage, p < .001). Incarcerated patients were diagnosed at later stages for colorectal (+0.93 T stage, p < .001; +.48 N stage, p < .001), oropharyngeal (+0.37 N stage, p = .003), lung (+0.60 N stage, p = .018), skin (+0.59 N stage, p = 0.014), and screenable cancers (colorectal, prostate, lung) as a whole (+0.23 T stage, p = 0.002; +0.17 N stage, p = 0.008). Incarcerated patients may benefit from more structured screening protocols in order to improve the stage at presentation for certain malignancies.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerHealth Services AccessibilityInsurance CoverageNeoplasm StagingPrisonersAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesTertiary Care Centers

Identifiers

PMID32931490
PMCPMC7491712
OpenAlexW3087127432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.