ArticlePloS one2024
Using a Bayesian analytic approach to identify county-level ecological factors associated with survival among individuals with early-onset colorectal cancer.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
backgroundIn the United States (US), incidence of early age of onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC, diagnosed <50 years of age) has been increasing. Using a Bayesian analytic approach, we evaluated the association between county-level ecological factors and survival among individuals with EOCRC and identified hotspot and coldspot counties with unexplained low and high survival, respectively.
methodsPrincipal component (PC) analysis was used to reduce dimensionality of 36 county-level social, behavioral, and preventive factors from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. Survival information was derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program data from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2019. The association between the identified PCs and survival was evaluated using multivariable spatial generalized linear mixed models. Counties with residual low and high survival (i.e., unexplained by the PCs) were classified as hotspots and coldspots, respectively.
resultsFour PCs were used to explain the spatial variability in 5-year survival among 75,215 individuals with EOCRC: PC1) poverty, chronic disease, health risk behaviors (β = -0.03, 95% credible interval (CrI): -0.04, -0.03); PC2) younger age, chronic disease-free, minority status (β = -0.01, 95% CrI: -0.02, 0.00); PC3) urban environment, preventive services (β = 0.02, 95% CrI: 0.00, 0.03); and PC4) older age (-0.04, 95% CrI: -0.06, -0.02). Among individuals with distant malignancies, the residual spatial variability remained high for two US counties: 1) Salt Lake County, UT residents experiencing 26.5% (95% CrI: 1.5%, 47.8%) lower odds of survival [hotspot], and 2) Riverside County, CA residents experiencing 37% (95% CrI: 7.97%, 78.8%) higher odds survival [coldspot] after adjustment for county-level factors.
conclusionsCounty-level ecological factors are strongly associated with survival among individuals with EOCRC. Yet there is some evidence of survival disparities among individuals with distant malignancies that remain unexplained by the included factors.
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.