ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2025
Neighborhood Factors Related to Cancer Screening in Texas: A Spatioecological Study.
Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neighborhood Factors and Treatment Outcomes in Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A REDIAL Consortium Report.Cancer research communications · 2026Article
- Immigration and Social Factors, Tumor Stage, and Risk of Contralateral Breast Cancer in Asian American and Hispanic Women.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- The Lingering Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Screening Modalities and Staging by Neighborhood-Level Deprivation.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Geospatial analysis as a tool for identification of potential targetable regions for lung cancer screening interventions in Massachusetts.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Observational
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
introductionThe purpose of this study is to examine the associations of neighborhood socioeconomic status, ethnic enclaves, and residential Black segregation with screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers across the state of Texas.
methodsUsing an ecologic study design, spatial clustering of low breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening rates were identified across Texas census tracts using local Moran's I statistics. Binomial spatial probit regression was used to estimate the associations between nSES, Hispanic/Latino and Asian American ethnic enclave neighborhoods and residential Black segregation with geospatial clusters of low screening, adjusting for behavioral characteristics. Analysis was conducted in 2024.
resultsOf 5,186 tracts, 5.4%, 4.6%, and 8.7% tracts were in low screening clusters for colorectal, cervical, and breast cancer, respectively. Medium and high neighborhood socioeconomic status tracts had reduced odds of being part of low cervical cancer screening clusters. Medium neighborhood socioeconomic status tracts and Hispanic enclave tracts had increased odds of being within a low breast cancer screening cluster. Asian American enclave tracts displayed an increased odds of being in low colorectal cancer and low cervical cancer screening clusters. Tracts with high residential Black segregation demonstrated reduced odds of being in low colorectal cancer and low breast cancer screening clusters.
conclusionsGeospatial clusters of screening uptake are associated with neighborhood socioeconomic status and racial and ethnic neighborhood characteristics. This indicates a need for place-based culturally sensitive interventions to address the specific assets and needs of communities with low screening uptake.
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.