ArticleBMJ open2022
Are deprivation-specific cancer survival patterns similar according to individual-based and area-based measures? A cohort study of patients diagnosed with five malignancies in England and Wales, 2008-2016.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. 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.
- Socioeconomic inequality in treatment of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) in England, 2015-2022: A population-based study.British journal of haematology · 2026Article
- Socio-economic inequalities in second primary cancer incidence: A competing risks analysis of women with breast cancer in England between 2000 and 2018.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Socio-economic position, area-level deprivation and gradients in cancer incidence: England and Wales, 1971-2016.BMC public health · 2025Article
- 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
objectiveTo investigate if measured inequalities in cancer survival differ when using individual-based ('person') compared with area-based ('place') measures of deprivation for three socioeconomic dimensions: income, deprivation and occupation.
designCohort study.
settingData from the Office for National Statistics Longitudinal Study of England and Wales, UK, linked to the National Cancer Registration Database.
participantsPatients diagnosed with cancers of the colorectum, breast, prostate, bladder or with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma during the period 2008-2016. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Differentials in net survival between groups defined by individual wage, occupation and education compared with those obtained from corresponding area-level metrics using the English and Welsh Indices of Multiple Deprivation.
resultsSurvival was negatively associated with area-based deprivation irrespective of the type analysed, although a trend from least to most deprived was not always observed. Socioeconomic differences were present according to individually-measured socioeconomic groups although there was an absence of a consistent 'gradient' in survival. The magnitude of differentials was similar for area-based and individually-derived measures of deprivation, which was unexpected.
conclusionThese unique data suggest that the socioeconomic influence of 'person' is different to that of 'place' with respect to cancer outcomes. This has implications for health policy aimed at reducing inequalities. Further research could consider the separate and additional influence of area-based deprivation over individual-level characteristics (contextual effects) as well as investigate the geographic, socioeconomic and healthcare-related characteristics of areas with poor outcomes in order to inform policy intervention.
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.