ArticleBMC cancer2024
Racial disparities in the frequency and timing of code status orders among women with breast cancer.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBlack/African American women with breast cancer have a disproportionately higher risk of mortality compared to other race groups, although their overall incidence of disease is lower. Despite this, advance care planning (ACP) and consequent code status documentation remain low in this vulnerable patient population. Code status orders (i.e., Full code, Do Not Attempt Resuscitation [DNAR], Do Not Intubate [DNI]) allow consideration of patient preferences regarding the use of aggressive treatments, such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation and intubation. The aim of this study is to characterize presence of code status orders and determine whether race affects code status documentation after the first encounter for breast cancer.
methodsData were derived from 7524 women with breast cancer from the University of Chicago Medical Center (UCMC) between 2016 and 2021. Cox regression was used to estimate the effects of race and adjusted for age, ethnicity, inpatient stays, metastatic breast cancer, marital status, and body mass index.
resultsThe sample included 60.5% White, 3.6% Asian/Mideast Indian, 28.9% Black/African American, and 7.0% other or unknown race. Results indicate that code status orders after the first breast cancer encounter were uncommon (7.2%). Black/African American race (HR = 2.74; 95% CI: 1.75, 4.28) emerged as a significant factor associated with any code status orders compared to other race groups even when adjusting for covariates.
conclusionsCode status documentation in this sample of women with breast cancer was low overall, yet rates were higher among Black/African American patients compared to other race groups. In fact, race remains a significant predictor of code status documentation even when accounting for indirect measures of cancer severity. This could be denoting the racial disparities (e.g., higher cancer malignancy such as triple negative breast cancer) in breast cancer mortality risk. Future research is needed to identify factors unique to Black/African American women that would increase code status documentation so that goal concordant care can be prioritized among patients with breast cancer.
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.