ArticleBMJ quality & safety2025
Socioeconomic inequalities in adherence to clinical practice guidelines and breast cancer survival: a multicentre population-based study in Spain.
Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Socioeconomic disparities in treatment and survival of oesophageal and gastric cancer in the Netherlands: a nationwide population-based study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Breast cancer incidence and survival by subtype, stage at diagnosis and socioeconomic deprivation among young women in the Community of Madrid, Spain.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Impact of socioeconomic status on tumor stage, molecular subtype distribution, treatment adherence, and survival outcomes in breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Improving equitable access to comprehensive care for people with advanced breast cancer: a global expert review and call-to-action for 2025-2035 (Goal 9).Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
aimsWomen residing in lower socioeconomic status (SES) areas have lower breast cancer survival but it is not clear how differences in the quality of care received contribute to these disparities. We compared adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer and subsequent breast cancer survival between women residing in lower versus higher SES areas.
methodsWe conducted a multicentre population-based study of all new cases of invasive breast cancer in women diagnosed 2010-2014 in six Spanish provinces with population-based cancer registries (n=3206). Clinical data were extracted in the framework of the European Cancer High Resolution studies and vital status follow-up covered a minimum of 5 years. SES of the patient's residence was measured with the 2011 Spanish Deprivation Index. Adherence to CPG was measured with 16 indicators based on European and Spanish guidelines. Relative survival was modelled using flexible parametric models.
resultsThere were no differences in the type of treatment received but women living in the lowest SES areas were less likely to undergo a sentinel lymph node biopsy, reconstruction after mastectomy, surgery within 30 days after pathological diagnosis and adjuvant treatment within 6 weeks after surgery. After accounting for demographic and clinical factors, women residing in lower SES areas had higher risk of death, HR=1.57 (95% CI 1.04, 2.36). Further accounting for adherence to CPG in the model, in particular having undergone a sentinel lymph node biopsy, eliminated the significant effect of SES.
conclusionsDespite the overall coverage of the Spanish health system, women living in more deprived areas were less likely to receive care in line with CPG and had shorter survival.
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.