ArticleOTO open
The Impact of Digital Inequities on Oropharyngeal Cancer Disparities in the United States.
Article in OTO open. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess associations of digital inequity with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) prognostic and care outcomes in the United States while adjusting for traditional social determinants/drivers of health (SDoH). Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: United States. Methods: In total, 70,604 patients from 2008 to 2017 were assessed for regression trends in long-term follow-up period, survival, prognosis, and treatment across increasing overall digital inequity, as measured by the Digital Inequity Index (DII). DII is based on 17 census-tract level variables derived from the American Community Survey and Federal Communications Commission. Variables were categorized as infrastructure-access (ie, digital-related variables) or sociodemographic (ie, education, income, and disability status) and weighted-averaged into a composite score. Results: With increasing DII, decreases in length of follow-up (10.22%, 32.9-29.5 months; Conclusion: Digital inequities contribute to detrimental trends in OPC patient care and prognosis in the United States. These findings can inform strategic discourse targeted against the most pertinent disparities in the modern-day environment.
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.