ArticleObstetrics and gynecology2025
Fragmented Care and Guideline-Concordant Treatment in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.
Article in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2025. 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
objectiveTo characterize and estimate rates of fragmented care, to investigate its association with the receipt of guideline-concordant treatment, and to evaluate treatment components at risk with fragmented care.
methodsThis is a single-institution retrospective study of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (stage IB3-IVA) from January 2003 to September 2023. We stratified patients into fragmented and nonfragmented care groups based on receipt of all care at our institution or if they received any component of care outside of our institution. The primary outcome, receipt of guideline-concordant treatment , was defined as a composite of 1) completion of treatment within 56 days, 2) completion of brachytherapy, and 3) receipt of concurrent chemotherapy. Demographic and treatment data were collected, including the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), a census tract-based measure of disadvantage. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.
resultsTwo hundred eighty-six patients were identified; 75.5% received fragmented care. Those receiving nonfragmented care were significantly more likely to receive guideline-concordant treatment than those receiving fragmented care (71.4% vs 50.9%, P =.003). This was driven primarily by rates of timely completion (81.4% vs 60.6%, P =.001). Univariate analysis indicated that fragmented care (odds ratio [OR] 0.42, 95% CI, 0.23-0.74) and Medicaid insurance (OR 0.40, 95% CI, 0.20-0.78) were significantly associated with lower odds of guideline-concordant treatment. Multivariate analyses controlling for a priori confounders of insurance type and SVI showed that fragmented care (OR 0.45, 95% CI, 0.23-0.90) and Medicaid insurance (OR 0.42, 95% CI, 0.19-0.89) were independently associated with lower odds of guideline-concordant treatment. Multivariate analysis controlling for demographic covariates found even lower odds of receiving guideline-concordant treatment in those who received fragmented care (OR 0.39, 95% CI, 0.18-0.84) and who had Medicaid insurance (OR 0.35, 95% CI, 0.16-0.78).
conclusionMore than 75% of patients received fragmented care, which had a significant clinical effect and was associated with significantly lower rates of guideline-concordant treatment.
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.