Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39470664›Full record

ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2025

Impact of travel distance on short-term outcomes in patients receiving treatment for urolithiasis A population-based study.

Danielle Jenkins, Greg Hosier, Marlo Whitehead, Darren Beiko, Thomas McGregor, Joseph Nashed, D Robert Siemens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Danielle JenkinsDepartment of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Greg HosierDepartment of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Marlo WhiteheadICES-Queen's, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Darren BeikoDepartment of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Thomas McGregorDepartment of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Joseph NashedDepartment of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
D Robert SiemensDepartment of Urology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe aimed to assess the relationship between the distance traveled to receive treatment for urolithiasis and early outcomes.

methodsUsing administrative data, patients who received interventions for urolithiasis in Ontario between 2003 and 2019 were stratified into three groups according to distance traveled. Descriptive statistics and the Chi-squared test were used to examine differences between these groups based on the treatment of choice. The primary outcomes were reoperation and readmission rates. To identify the factors associated with the co-primary outcomes, both univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used.

resultsA total of 127 195 patients were included in the final analysis, with most patients (78.7%) having their stone procedure within 30 km from their residence, whereas 7.5% traveled a distance >90 km. Most of those who traveled >90 km were for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) (59%). Type of procedure and region of residence were the only variables that appeared to have a clinically relevant association with greater distance traveled. Unadjusted analysis suggested longer distance traveled was associated with a decrease in the need for a repeat procedure; however, this was likely confounded by an association between distance traveled and procedure type. In adjusted analysis, early post-procedure health resource use did not appear to be dramatically increased with greater distance from care; readmission rates at 30 days were marginally lower among those who traveled 30-60 km vs. <30 km (odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.92) and had no detectable difference at >90 km vs. <30 km (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.08). These observations of fewer or no difference in readmissions and emergency visits for those that traveled the greatest distances generally held true in the subgroup analysis for each surgical procedure.

conclusionsThis population-based study found no clinically remarkable associations between the distance traveled for urolithiasis treatment and early outcomes. In fact, some marginal decreases in resource use were observed with greater travel distance, perhaps reflecting some effect of travel to higher-volume referral centers or enhanced processes for those that needed to travel farther for care.

Identifiers

PMID39470664
PMCPMC11790041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.