ArticleBJC reports2024
Head and neck cancer mortality in the United States: Regional differences in hospice use and place of death.
Article in BJC reports, 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.
- Place of death among adults with interstitial lung disease in the United States, 1999-2023: a national population-based study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith more than 15,000 annual deaths from head and neck cancer (HNC), an important aspect of end-of-life care for these patients is place of death. Recent evidence suggests an increasing preference for home/hospice at end of life; however, it is unclear whether there is variation in home/hospice use based on region or urban status. We described differences in the place of death of HNC patients based on their region and urban status.
methodsUsing the CDC WONDER (Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research) database for HNC mortality (1999 to 2019), place of death was dichotomized as home/hospice vs. other, by Health and Human Services (HHS) region (Regions 1-10), and by urbanization status. Multivariable logistic regression analyses estimated odds of place of death being home/hospice, and being urban/metro, adjusting for both clinical and nonclinical variables.
resultsOver the study period, there were 260,630 deaths, 47.4% of which were at home or hospice. Compared to patients in New England/Region 1 (CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, and VT), HNC patients were more likely to die at home/hospice in the Pacific Northwest/Region 10 (AK, ID, OR, WA) (aOR (1.73; 95% CI: 1.64, 1.83) and less likely in the Eastern Section/Region 2 (NJ, NY, PR, VI) (aOR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.89, 0.97). Further, large central metro areas had significantly lower rates of dying at home/hospice than did all other settings.
conclusionPatients in moderately urban areas were reported to have the greatest use of hospice services and at-home death; patients in the HHS Region representing Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington were also found to have the highest rates of use. These differences in hospice care should be considered when clinicians counsel patients on their end-of-life options.
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.