ArticleBMC health services research2021
Mono-institutional retrospective cohort analysis of the insurance status dependent access to ENT-professionals and survival in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo access the influence of insurance status on time of diagnosis, quality of treatment and survival in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).
methodsThis mono-institutional retrospective cohort analysis included all HNSCC patients (n = 1,054) treated between 2001 and 2011, and subdivided the cohort according to the insurance status. Differences between the groups were analyzed using the Chi square and the unpaired student's t-test. Survival rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression for forward selection.
resultsNine hundred twenty-five patients showed general, 129 private insurance. The 2 groups were equal regarding age, gender, tumor localization, therapy, and N/M/G/R-status. The T-status differed significantly between the groups showing more advanced tumors in patients with general insurance (p = 0.002). While recurrence-free survival was comparable in both groups, overall survival was significantly better in private patients (p = 0.009). The time frame between first symptom and diagnosis was equal in both groups.
conclusionsThe time frame between subjective percipience of first symptom and final therapy did not differ between the groups. In our cohort, access to otorhinolaryngological specialists is favorable in both, patients with general and private insurance. Recurrence-free survival was comparable in both groups, indicating successful HNSCC treatment both groups. However, overall survival was significantly better in patients with private insurance suggesting other socioeconomic factors influencing survival.
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.