Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36123112›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Explaining regional variations in colon cancer survival in Ontario, Canada: a population-based retrospective cohort study.

Colleen Webber, Michael Brundage, Timothy P Hanna, Christopher M Booth, Erin Kennedy, Weidong Kong, Yingwei Peng, Marlo Whitehead, Patti A Groome

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Colleen WebberBruyere Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9193-5386
Michael BrundageDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Timothy P HannaDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Christopher M BoothDepartment of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Erin KennedyUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Weidong KongDivision of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Yingwei PengDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Marlo WhiteheadICES, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Patti A GroomeDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada groomep@queensu.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesRegional variation in cancer survival is an important health system performance measurement. We evaluated if regional variation in colon cancer survival may be driven by differences in the patient population, their health and healthcare utilisation, and/or cancer care delivery.

designPopulation-based retrospective cohort study using routinely collected linked health administrative data.

settingOntario, Canada.

participantsPatients with colon cancer diagnosed between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2012. OUTCOME: Cancer-specific survival was compared across the province's 14 health regions. Using accelerated failure time models, we assessed whether regional survival variations were mediated through differences in case mix, including age, sex, comorbidities, stage at diagnosis and colon subsite, potential marginalisation and/or prediagnosis healthcare.

resultsThe study population included 16 895 patients with colon cancer. There was statistically significant regional variation in cancer-specific survival. Three regions had cancer-specific survival that was between 30% (95% CI 1.03 to 1.65) and 39% (95% CI 1.13 to 1.71) longer and one region had cancer-specific survival that was 26% shorter (95% CI 0.58 to 0.93) than the reference region. For three of these regions, case mix explained between 26% and 56% of the survival variation. Further adjustment for rurality explained 22% of the remaining survival variation in one region. Adjustment for continuity of primary care and the diagnostic interval length explained 10% and 11% of the remaining survival variation in two other regions. Socioeconomic marginalisation, recent immigration and colonoscopy history did not explain colon cancer survival variation.

conclusionsCase mix accounted for much of the regional variation in colon cancer survival, indicating that efforts to monitor the quality of cancer care through survival metrics should consider case mix when reporting regional survival differences. Future work should repeat this approach in other settings and other cancer sites considering a broad range of potential mediators.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsCohort StudiesHumansOntarioRetrospective Studiesepidemiologygastrointestinal tumoursquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID36123112
PMCPMC9486232

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.