ArticlePloS one2024
Disparities in outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery among adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bowel cancer care in individuals with an intellectual disability: a population-based cohort study of symptoms, diagnostic pathways, treatment and survival.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and Cancer Symptom Severity: A Matched Retrospective Cohort Study.Psycho-oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDisparities in colorectal cancer screening have been documented among people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). However, surgical outcomes in this population have yet to be studied. The present work aimed to evaluate the association of IDD with outcomes following colorectal cancer resection.
methodsAll adults undergoing resection for colorectal cancer in the 2011-2020 National Inpatient Sample were identified. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were developed to examine the association of IDD with risk factors as well as outcomes including mortality, complications, costs, length of stay (LOS), and non-home discharge. The study is limited by its retrospective nature and did not capture disease staging or time of diagnosis.
resultsAmong 722,736 patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection, 2,846 (0.39%) had IDD. Compared to patients without IDD, IDD patients were younger and had a higher burden of comorbidities. IDD status was associated with increased odds of non-elective admission (AOR 1.40 [95% CI 1.14-1.73]) and decreased odds of treatment at high-volume centers (AOR 0.64 [95% CI 0.51-0.81]). Furthermore, IDD patients experienced significantly greater LOS (9 vs 6 days, p<0.001) and hospitalization costs ($23,500 vs $19,800, p<0.001) relative to neurotypical patients. Upon risk adjustment, IDD was significantly associated with 2-fold increased odds of mortality (AOR 2.34 [95% CI 1.48-3.71]), 1.4-fold increase in complications (AOR 1.41 [95% CI 1.15-1.74]), and 6.8-fold increase in non-home discharge (AOR 6.83 [95% CI 5.46-8.56]).
conclusionsIDD patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection experience increased likelihood of non-elective admission, adverse clinical outcomes, and resource use. Our findings highlight the need for more accessible screening and patient-centered interventions to improve quality of surgical care for this at-risk population.
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.