ArticleSurgery open science2024
Surgical subspecialist distribution and Social Vulnerability Indices in the inland empire.
Article in Surgery open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Access to surgical specialty care differs based on geographic location, insurance status, and subspecialty type. This study uses the Inland Empire as a model to determine the relationship between Social Vulnerability Indices (SVIs), surgeon sex, and surgical subspecialty distribution. Methods: 823 census tracts from the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) SVI 2018 database were compared against 992 surgeons within 30 distinct subspecialties. This data was retrieved from the American Medical Association's (AMA) 2018 Physician Masterfile. Spearman's bivariate and multiple regression were used to compare the relationship between SVI and number of surgical subspecialists within each census tract. Results: There were approximately 3.34 male and 0.35 female surgeons per census tract ( Conclusions: This study concludes that social vulnerability is predictive of, and significantly linked to, differences in distribution of surgical subspecialty and surgeon gender. Future research should investigate recruitment of a diverse surgical workforce, infrastructural barriers to care, and differences in quality of care. Key message: Our work demonstrates complex relationships between surgical subspecialist distribution, surgeon gender, and a census tract's various Social Vulnerability Indices. Thus, this research can serve to continue educating surgeons and other healthcare providers about the importance of social determinants of health in the construction of healthcare policy and practice, as well as incentivizing equitable recruitment of a diverse population of surgeons.
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.