Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33243814›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Assessment of the concordance between individual-level and area-level measures of socio-economic deprivation in a cancer patient cohort in England and Wales.

Fiona C Ingleby, Aurélien Belot, Iain Atherton, Matthew Baker, Lucy Elliss-Brookes, Laura M Woods

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Small-Area Geographic and Socioeconomic Inequalities in Colorectal Cancer in Cyprus.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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

6 authors.

Fiona C InglebyInequalities in Cancer Outcomes Network, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK fiona.ingleby@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1800-2015
Aurélien BelotInequalities in Cancer Outcomes Network, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1410-5172
Iain AthertonSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1822-3240
Matthew BakerConsumer Forum, National Cancer Research Institute, London, UK.
Lucy Elliss-BrookesNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK.
Laura M WoodsInequalities in Cancer Outcomes Network, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2178-1577

Funding

Cancer Research UK 11700Cancer Research UK 29018Cancer Research UK C7923/A18525
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMost research on health inequalities uses aggregated deprivation scores assigned to the small area where the patient lives; however, the concordance between aggregate area-level deprivation measures and personal deprivation experienced by individuals living in the area is poorly understood. Our objective was to examine the agreement between individual and ecological deprivation. We tested the concordance between metrics of income, occupation and education at individual and area levels, and assessed the reliability of area-based deprivation measures to predict individual deprivation circumstances.

settingEngland and Wales.

participantsA cancer patient cohort of 9547 individuals extracted from the Office for National Statistics Longitudinal Study. OUTCOMES: We quantified the concordance between measures of income, occupation and education at individual and area level. In addition, we used ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curves and the area under the curve (AUC) to assess the reliability of area-based deprivation measures to predict individual deprivation circumstances.

resultsWe found low concordance between individual-level and area-level indicators of deprivation (Cramer's

conclusionsOur results indicate that ecological deprivation measures capture only part of the relationship between deprivation and health outcomes, especially with respect to income measurement. This has important implications for our understanding of the relationship between deprivation and health, and, as a consequence, healthcare policy. The results have a wide-reaching impact for the way in which we measure and monitor inequalities, and in turn, fund and organise current UK healthcare policy aimed at reducing them.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsEnglandFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleReproducibility of ResultsSocioeconomic FactorsWalesepidemiologypublic health

Identifiers

PMID33243814
PMCPMC7692821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.