Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38560814›Full record

ArticleJCO oncology practice2024

Estimating the Impact of Rurality in Disparities in Cancer Mortality.

Kelly M Kenzik, Elizabeth S Davis, Jeffrey A Franks, Smita Bhatia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO oncology practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Self-advocacy training within a peer navigation model in advanced cancer: a pilot study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The rural disadvantage - prostate cancer outcomes of rural and urban patients over 25 years.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2025
    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.

Kelly M KenzikDepartment of Surgery, Boston University, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-6402-8446
Elizabeth S DavisDepartment of Surgery, Boston University, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-6480-2083
Jeffrey A FranksDivision of Hematology and Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.ORCID 0000-0001-9076-9072
Smita BhatiaInstitute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.ORCID 0000-0002-7755-5683

Funding

Understanding rural mortality disparities in cancer: a multi-level approachR37CA266193 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI KELLY KENZIK · 2022 to 2026
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS R37 CA266193
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEstimation of the independent effect of rurality on cancer mortality requires causal inference methodology and consideration of area-level socioeconomic status and rural designations.

methodsUsing SEER data, we identified key incident cancers diagnosed between 2000 and 2016 at age ≥20 years (N = 3,788,273), examining a 20% random sample (n = 757,655). Standardized competing risk and survival models estimated the association between rural residence, defined by Rural-Urban Continuum Codes, and cancer-specific and all-cause mortality, controlling for age at cancer diagnosis, sex, race/ethnicity, year of diagnosis, and Area Deprivation Index (ADI). We estimated the attributable fraction (AF) of rurality and high ADI (ADI > median) to the probability of mortality. Finally, we examined county measurement issues contributing to mortality rates discordant from hypothesized rates.

resultsThe 5-year standardized failure probability for cancer mortality for rural patients was 33.9% versus 31.56% for urban. The AF for rural residence was 1.04% at year 1 (0.89% by year 5), the highest among local stage disease (Y1 2.1% to Y5 1.9%). The AF for high ADI was 3.33% in Y1 (2.87% in Y5), while the joint effect of rural residence and high ADI was 4.28% in Y1 (3.71% in Y5). Twenty-two percent of urban counties and 30% of rural were discordant. Among discordant urban counties, 30% were only considered urban because of adjacency to metro area. High ADI was associated with urban discordance and low ADI with rural discordance.

conclusionRural residence independently contributes to cancer mortality. The rural impact is the greatest among those with localized disease and in high deprivation areas. Rural-urban county designations may mask high-need urban counties, limiting eligibility to state and federal resources dedicated to rural areas.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesNeoplasmsRural PopulationSocioeconomic Disparities in HealthAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Status DisparitiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMortalityResidence CharacteristicsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID38560814
PMCPMC11440519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.