ArticlePreventing chronic disease2021
Spatial Insights for Understanding Colorectal Cancer Screening in Disproportionately Affected Populations, Central Texas, 2019.
Article in Preventing chronic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Spatial Analysis on Electronic Health Records to Characterize Patient Phenotypes: Systematic Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Pooled it
- Area-Level Determinants in Colorectal Cancer Spatial Clustering Studies: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- A Practical Strategy of Informatics, Geospatial Mapping, Geodemographic Segmentation, and Regression Analyses to Address Nonadherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Lower Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Status Is Associated with Lower Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake in the Southern Community Cohort Study.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Individual and geospatial factors associated with receipt of colorectal cancer screening: a state-wide mixed-level analysis.Family medicine and community health · 2024Article
- Barriers and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening using the 5As framework: A systematic review of US studies.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Review
- Equitable Implementation of Mailed Stool Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening and Patient Navigation in a Safety Net Health System.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Using GIS to Identify Priority Sites for Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs in Texas Health Centers.Preventing chronic disease · 2023Article
- Cancer Screening Prevalence and Associated Factors Among US Adults.Preventing chronic disease · 2022Article
- Rate and associated factors of refusal to perform immunochemical Faecal Occult Blood Test (iFOBT) among semi-urban communities.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionColorectal cancer (CRC) screening can reduce morbidity and mortality; however, important disparities exist in CRC uptake. Our study examines the associations of distance to care and frequency of using primary care and screening.
methodsTo examine the distribution of screening geographically and according to several demographic features, we used individual patient-level data, dated September 30, 2018, from a large urban safety-net health system in Central Texas. We used spatial cluster analysis and logistic regression adjusted for age, race, sex, socioeconomic status, and health insurance status.
resultsWe obtained screening status data for 13,079 age-eligible patients from the health system's electronic medical records. Of those eligible, 55.1% were female, and 55.9% identified as Hispanic. Mean age was 58.1 years. Patients residing more than 20 miles from one of the system's primary care clinics was associated with lower screening rates (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.93). Patients with higher screening rates included those who had a greater number of primary care-related (nonspecialty) visits within 1 year (OR, 6.90; 95% CI, 6.04-7.88) and those who were part of the county-level medical assistance program (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.40-1.84). Spatial analysis identified an area where the level of CRC screening was particularly low.
conclusionDistance to primary care and use of primary care were associated with screening. Priorities in targeted interventions should include identifying and inviting patients with limited care engagements.
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.