ArticleOral and maxillofacial surgery2022
Socioeconomic influence on treatment and outcome of patients with oral cancer in Germany.
Article in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a nomogram model for predicting postoperative delirium in elderly patients with oral cancer: a retrospective study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effects of age on postoperative oral function in older adults with oral squamous cell carcinoma and its cutoff values: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Socioeconomic disparities between oral cavity cancer patients in Germany.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo illustrate the influence of different socioeconomic factors on the treatment and outcome of patients in Germany with oral cancer.
methodsIn this retrospective single-center study, 400 patients of our department of oral and maxillofacial surgery with primary cases of oral cancer were included. Preoperative diagnostics, occupational groups, and marital and health insurance status were evaluated. Overall and disease-specific survival were analyzed. Occupations were distinguished in 5 groups (unemployed, physically light workers, physically hard worker, university graduate, and freelancer). Data were adjusted to covariables like tumor size, positive lymph nodes, age, alcohol, or tobacco abuse.
resultsThere was no differences between private and statutory insured patients concerning overall (p = 0.858) or disease-specific survival (p = 0.431). Private insured patients received more preoperative PET-CT (p = 0.046) and had a better dental status (p = 0.006). The occupational groups showed also no differences in survival (p = 0.963). The hospitalization of freelancers was in average 2 days shorter. Physically hard workers were diagnosed with bigger tumors (p = 0.018) and consumed more tobacco and alcohol. The 5-year survival rate of married patients was approximately 20% points better than not married patients, without showing a significant difference over the entire observation time (p = 0.084).
conclusionIn our cohort, socioeconomic factors have just a limited influence on the survival or treatment of patients with oral cancer. A sufficient statutory health insurance system is a reasonable explanation for this.
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.