Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33093159›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2021

Determinants of Guideline-Discordant Breast Cancer Care.

Jean A McDougall, Linda S Cook, Mei-Tzu C Tang, Hannah M Linden, Beti Thompson, Christopher I Li

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis: One Decade Later.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Review
  2. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jean A McDougallUniversity of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico. jamcdougall@salud.unm.edu.
Linda S CookUniversity of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Mei-Tzu C TangDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Hannah M LindenClinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0001-5048-2819
Beti ThompsonDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0002-8519-649X
Christopher I LiDivision of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
University of Washington · USUniversity of New Mexico · USFred Hutch Cancer Center · US

Funding

WOMEN'S CANCERS RESEARCH PROGRAMP30CA118100 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI Yolanda Sanchez · 2005 to 2026
$57.1M
Understanding and preventing breast cancer disparties in LatinasP50CA148143 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI THOMPSON, BETI · 2010 to 2016
$9.7M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA118100NCI NIH HHS P50 CA148143
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based breast cancer treatment guidelines recommend the most appropriate course of therapy based on tumor characteristics and extent of disease. Evaluating the multilevel factors associated with guideline discordance is critical to identifying strategies to eliminate breast cancer survival disparities.

methodsWe identified females diagnosed with a first primary, stage I-III breast cancer between the ages of 20-69 years of age from the population-based Seattle-Puget Sound Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry. Participants completed a survey about social support, utilization of patient support services, hypothesized barriers to care, and initiation of breast cancer treatment. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

resultsAmong 1,390 participants, 10% reported guideline-discordant care. In analyses adjusted for patient-level sociodemographic factors, individuals who did not have someone to go with them to appointments or drive them home (OR 1.96; 95% CI, 1.09-3.59) and those who had problems talking to their doctors or their staff (OR 2.03; 95% CI, 1.13-3.64) were more likely to be guideline discordant than those with social support or without such problems, respectively. Use of patient support services was associated with a 43% lower odds of guideline discordance (OR 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.88).

conclusionsAlthough guideline discordance in this cohort of early-stage breast cancer survivors diagnosed <70 years of age was low, instrumental social support, patient support services, and communication with doctors and their staff emerged as potential multilevel intervention targets for improving breast cancer care delivery. IMPACT: This study supports extending the reach of interventions designed to improve guideline concordance.

Indexed as

Social SupportAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsFemaleGuideline AdherenceHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMiddle AgedPhysician-Patient RelationsRegistriesRetrospective StudiesSocioeconomic FactorsWashington

Identifiers

PMID33093159
PMCPMC7855615
OpenAlexW3094619926

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.