ArticleInternational journal of studies in nursing2021
A Comparative Study of Health Disparities in Cervical Cancer Mortality Rates Through Time Between Black and Caucasian Women in Alabama and the US.
Article in International journal of studies in nursing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unequal paths to care: a scoping review of access and cancer outcomes in Alabama.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- Environmental factors shaping cancer outcomes in Alabama: A scoping review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- Community-level Social Vulnerability and Cervical Cancer Mortality Among Young and Old Adults in the State of Alabama.Journal of community health · 2025Article
- Structural Racism in Cervical Cancer Care and Survival Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Inequities and Barriers.Current epidemiology reports · 2025Review
- Breast and Cervical cancer disparities in Alabama: current scenario, ongoing efforts to reduce the disparity gaps, and what more we could be doing.Cancer health disparities · 2022Article
- Article
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
Abstract
Background: The main purpose of this study was to assess changes in cervical cancer mortality rates through time between Black and Caucasian women residing in Alabama and the US. Methods: Alabama cervical cancer mortality rates (MR), percentage differences, percentage changes and annual percentage changes for trends were compared with the US baseline and target rates. The US Baseline data and target objectives of utilization of cervical cancer screening and MR were obtained from Healthy People 2020. The cervical cancer behavioral risk factors and utilization of screening tests data were obtained from CDC's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). The cervical cancer MR data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER). The analysis was done using SEER*Stat and Linear Trendlines analysis. Results: Although Blacks in Alabama had higher cervical cancer MR through times, a decreasing trend was noted for both races. However, in Alabama, there is no significant change in Blacks aged 65 years and older in cervical cancer MR, despite a high screening rate compared to Whites. In contrast, between 2002 and 2012, Whites in Alabama and the US made a significant progress toward the Healthy People 2020 goal. Conclusions: In Alabama, there exists cervical cancer MR disparity in Blacks despite the higher rates of screening for cervical cancer as would otherwise be expected. The state has not yet achieved the Healthy People 2020 goal. Public health officials should monitor progress toward reduction and/or elimination of these disparities by focusing in a follow up of screening.
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.