ArticleKansas journal of medicine2021
Rural-Urban Differences in Esophagectomy for Cancer.
Article in Kansas journal of medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Equivalent Disease-Specific Survival Between Rural and Urban Osteosarcoma Patients: A Retrospective Analysis of the SEER Database.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Intersection of Race, Rurality, and Income in Defining Access to Minimally Invasive Lung Surgery.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Differences in influenza testing and treatment in micropolitan versus metropolitan areas in the U.S. using medicare claims data from 2010 to 2016.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Examining associations in congenital syphilis infection and socioeconomic factors between California's small-to-medium and large metro counties.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatients who are disadvantaged socioeconomically or live in rural areas may not pursue surgery at high-volume centers where outcomes are better for some complex procedures. The objective of this study was to compare rural and urban patient differences directly by location of residence and outcomes after undergoing esophagectomy for cancer.
methodsAn analysis of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) database was performed, capturing adult patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy. Patients were stratified into rural or urban groups by the National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural Classification Scheme. Demographics, hospital variables, and outcomes were compared.
resultsA total of 2,877 patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were captured by the database, with 228 (7.92%) rural and 2,575 (89.50%) urban patients. The rural and urban groups had no differences in age, race, and insurance status, and shared many common comorbidities. Major outcomes of mortality (3.95% versus 4.27%, p = 0.815) and length of stay (15.75 ± 13.22 vs. 15.55 ± 14.91 days, p = 0.828) were similar for both rural and urban patients. There was a trend for rural patients to more likely be discharged home (35.96% vs. 29.79%, OR 0.667 [95% CI 0.479 - 0.929]; p = 0.0167).
conclusionsThis retrospective administrative database study indicated that rural and urban patients received equivalent postoperative care after undergoing esophagectomy. The findings were reassuring as there did not appear to be a disparity in major outcomes depending on the location of residence, but further studies are necessary to assure equitable treatment for rural patients.
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.