Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35997464›Full record

ArticleNursing reports (Pavia, Italy)2022

An Exploration of Rural-Urban Residence on Self-Reported Health Status with UK Cancer Survivors Following Treatment: A Brief Report.

David Nelson, Ian McGonagle, Christine Jackson, Ros Kane

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Cancer survivorship in urban people living with cancer following primary treatment: A secondary analysis of qualitative interview data.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

David NelsonLincoln International Institute for Rural Health, College of Social Science, University of Lincoln, Brayford Pool, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2173-683X
Ian McGonagleSchool of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, College of Social Science, Brayford Pool, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK.
Christine JacksonSchool of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, College of Social Science, Brayford Pool, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK.
Ros KaneSchool of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, College of Social Science, Brayford Pool, Lincoln LN6 7TS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6926-2530
University of Lincoln · GBMacmillan Cancer Support · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To explore the effect of rural−urban residence on the self-reported health status of UK cancer survivors following primary treatment. Design: A post-positivist approach utilizing a cross-sectional survey that collected data on demographics, postcode and self-reported health status. Methods: An independent samples t test was used to detect differences in health status between rural and urban respondents. Pearson’s χ2 was used to control for confounding variables and a multivariate analysis was conducted using Stepwise linear regression. Setting: East Midlands of England. Participants: Adult cancer survivors who had undergone primary treatment in the last five years. Participants were excluded if they had recurrence or metastatic spread, started active oncology treatment in the last twelve months, and/or were in receipt of palliative or end-of-life care. Main outcome: Residence was measured using the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) RUC2011 Rural−Urban Classifications and Health Status via the UK ONS self-reported health status measure. Ethics: The study was reviewed and approved (Ref: 17/WS/0054) by an NHS Research Ethics Committee and the Health Research Authority (HRA) prior to recruitment and data collection taking place. Results: 227 respondents returned a questionnaire (response rate 27%). Forty-five percent (n = 103) were resident in a rural area and fifty-three percent (n = 120) in an urban area. Rural (4.11 ± 0.85) respondents had significantly (p < 0.001) higher self-reported health statuses compared to urban (3.65 ± 0.93) respondents (MD 0.47; 95% CI 0.23, 0.70). Conclusion: It is hoped that the results will stimulate further work in this area and that researchers will be encouraged to collect data on rural−urban residency where appropriate.

Indexed as

cancer survivorshealth statusrural healthUnited Kingdomurban health

Identifiers

PMID35997464
PMCPMC9397029
OpenAlexW4292451783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.