ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings2025
Midwest Urban-Rural Differences in Cancer Prevalence.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Rurality: Individual Socioeconomic Status and Chronic Disease Prevalence.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- The Epidemiological and Histopathological Profiling of Basal Cell Carcinoma: Insights from a 4-Year Institutional Cohort in a Romanian Clinical County Hospital.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess differences in cancer prevalence across the urban-rural continuum, which may help identify target areas for cancer treatment and prevention efforts.
methodsWe identified residents of a 27-county region of Minnesota and Wisconsin on January 1, 2020, using the Rochester Epidemiology Project. Rural-urban commuting area classifications were used to categorize addresses as urban core, large town, small town, or isolated rural. Diagnostic codes were extracted from the 4 years prior. Codes were grouped into cancer types by Clinical Classifications Software Refined categories. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the effect of rurality on cancer prevalence. Analyses were stratified by rurality, directly standardized by age and sex to the total 2020 US population using survey sampling weights and analytically adjusted by including indicator variables for non-White race, Hispanic ethnicity, and smoking status.
resultsWe found a higher prevalence of Hodgkin lymphoma among isolated rural residents compared with urban residents (odds ratio [OR], 1.77; 95% CI, 1.28 to 2.44). In addition, men in large towns had a higher prevalence of throat cancer compared with urban men (OR, 1.57 [1.03 to 2.39]). Rural women had a higher prevalence of colorectal (large town: OR, 1.32 [1.12 to 1.55]; small town: OR, 1.23 [1.00 to 1.53]), anal (isolated rural: OR, 2.22 [1.27 to 3.88]), and ovarian (large town: OR, 1.40 [1.09 to 1.78]) cancer compared with women residing in urban areas.
conclusionOur findings underscore the importance of moving beyond the simple urban-rural dichotomy to address cancer disparities.
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.