Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33858869›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2021

Residential area and screening venue location features associated with spatial variation in breast cancer screening invitation response rates: an observational study in Greater Sydney, Australia.

Jahidur Rahman Khan, Suzanne Jane Carroll, Matthew Warner-Smith, David Roder, Mark Daniel

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

5 authors.

Jahidur Rahman KhanAustralian Geospatial Health Laboratory, Health Research Institute, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia jahidur.khan@canberra.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-3029-6303
Suzanne Jane CarrollAustralian Geospatial Health Laboratory, Health Research Institute, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Matthew Warner-SmithCancer Institute NSW, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
David RoderSchool of Health Sciences, Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6442-4409
Mark DanielAustralian Geospatial Health Laboratory, Health Research Institute, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesParticipation in breast cancer screening (BCS) varies at the small-area level, which may reflect environmental influences. This study assessed small-area variation in BCS invitation response rates (IRRs) and associations between small-area BCS IRR, sociodemographic factors, BCS venue distance and venue location features in Greater Sydney, Australia.

methodsBCS IRR data for 2011-2012 were compiled for 9528 Australian Bureau of Statistics Statistical Area Level 1 (SA1) units (n=227 474 women). A geographial information system was used to extract SA1-level sociodemographic features (proportions of women speaking English at home, full-time employed and university educated, and proportion of dwellings with motor vehicles), SA1-level distance to closest venue(s) (expressed as quartiles), and closest venue(s) colocated with bus stops, train station, hospital, general practitioner and shops. Associations between area-level features, BCS venue distance, venue location features and IRR were estimated using ordinary least square-type spatial lag models including area education as a covariate.

resultsBCS IRR varied across SA1s (mean=59.8%, range: 0%-100%), with notable spatial autocorrelation (Moran's I=0.803). BCS IRR was positively associated with greater SA1-level proportion of women speaking English at home (β=2.283, 95% CI 2.024 to 2.543), women's education (in the model including speaking English at home β=0.454, 95% CI 0.211 to 0.697), dwellings with motor vehicles (β=1.836, 95% CI 1.594 to 2.078), greater distance to venue (eg, most distant quartile compared with closest: β=6.249, 95% CI 5.489 to 7.008), and BCS venue colocated with shops (β=0.762, 95% CI 0.273 to 1.251). Greater SA1-level women employment (β=-0.613, 95% CI -0.898 to -0.328) and venue colocated with train station (β=-1.889, 95% CI -2.376 to -1.402) or hospital (β=-0.677, 95% CI -1.164 to -0.189) were inversely related to BCS IRR.

conclusionsSmall-area variation in BCS IRR exists for Greater Sydney and is strongly related to sociodemographic factors that, together with BCS venue location features, could inform targeted attempts to improve IRR.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAustraliaEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass ScreeningRacial Groupsepidemiologypreventive medicinepublic health

Identifiers

PMID33858869
PMCPMC8054194

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.