ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2021
Rural representation of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of Rurality, Travel Time, and Neighborhood Socioeconomics on Patterns of Adjuvant Therapy Receipt among Patients with Endometrial Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- Geographic variability in contemporary utilization of PET imaging for prostate cancer: a medicare claims cohort study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
- Disparities in tissue-based biomarker testing among US Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Shifting Sociodemographic Characteristics of a Phase I Clinical Trial Population at an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center in the Southeast.The oncologist · 2023Article
- The snapshot audit methodology: design, implementation and analysis of prospective observational cohort studies in surgery.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Review
- Lifetime personal cigarette smoking and risk of young-onset breast cancer by subtype among non-Hispanic Black and White women in the Young Women's Health History Study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- Disparities in the long-term survival of adolescent and young adult diffuse large B cell lymphoma survivors.Cancer epidemiology · 2021Article
- Geographic and Demographic Disparities in Receipt of Treatment for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSEER data are widely used to study rural-urban disparities in cancer. However, no studies have directly assessed how well the rural areas covered by SEER represent the broader rural United States.
methodsPublic data sources were used to calculate county level measures of sociodemographics, health behaviors, health access and all cause cancer incidence. Driving time from each census tract to nearest Commission on Cancer certified facility was calculated and analyzed in rural SEER and non-SEER areas.
resultsRural SEER and non-SEER counties were similar with respect to the distribution of age, race, sex, poverty, health behaviors, provider density, and cancer screening. Overall cancer incidence was similar in rural SEER vs non-SEER counties. However, incidence for White, Hispanic, and Asian patients was higher in rural SEER vs non-SEER counties. Unadjusted median travel time was 53 min (IQR 34-82) in rural SEER tracts and 54 min (IQR 35-82) in rural non-SEER census tracts. Linear modeling showed shorter travel times across all levels of rurality in SEER vs non-SEER census tracts when controlling for region (Large Rural: 13.4 min shorter in SEER areas 95% CI 9.1;17.6; Small Rural: 16.3 min shorter 95% CI 9.1;23.6; Isolated Rural: 15.7 min shorter 95% CI 9.9;21.6).
conclusionsThe rural population covered by SEER data is comparable to the rural population in non-SEER areas. However, patients in rural SEER regions have shorter travel times to care than rural patients in non-SEER regions. This needs to be considered when using SEER-Medicare to study access to cancer care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.