Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40533755›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025

"There's just such a mismatch": a qualitative exploration of health systems and organizational-level barriers to accessing cancer services among people experiencing structural marginalization.

Tara C Horrill, Jess Crawford, Scott Beck, Amber Bourgeois, Jagbir Kaur, Leah K Lambert, Michael McKenzie, Kelli I Stajduhar, Annette J Browne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Tara C HorrillUniversity of Manitoba, 89 Curry Place, Winnipeg, MB, R3R 2J3, Canada. tara.horrill@umanitoba.ca.
Jess CrawfordUniversity of Manitoba, 89 Curry Place, Winnipeg, MB, R3R 2J3, Canada.
Scott BeckNursing & Allied Health Research and Knowledge Translation, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada.
Amber BourgeoisUniversity of Victoria, Victoria, Canada.
Jagbir KaurNursing & Allied Health Research and Knowledge Translation, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada.
Leah K LambertNursing & Allied Health Research and Knowledge Translation, BC Cancer, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Michael McKenzieDepartment of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada.
Kelli I StajduharUniversity of Victoria, Victoria, Canada.
Annette J BrowneUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin the context of cancer care, access to timely, high-quality care is closely correlated with better health outcomes and quality of life. Yet in Canada, research continues to show that inequities in access to cancer care persist across the cancer continuum, particularly among people experiencing structural marginalization. Although some Canadian research has explored barriers accessing cancer care, little research has explicitly focused on barriers arising from organizational and health systems contexts. Our objective was to explore barriers to accessing cancer services within the health system and organizations delivering cancer services across the cancer continuum for people experiencing structural marginalization.

methodsThis study drew on critical ethnographic methods, employing a participatory, integrated knowledge translation approach. Data collection included interviews with health and social service providers (n = 24) and key informants (n = 7), interviews and focus groups with individuals with lived experience of significant health and social inequities (n = 29), and 40 h of observations with service providers working in clinical oncology settings. Guided by social justice, critical and intersectional theoretical perspectives, data analysis followed an interpretive descriptive approach.

resultsFour interrelated themes were developed through our analysis, with the overarching thread of a 'mismatch evident throughout: (1) the design of cancer services does not always account for social contexts and structural determinants of health; (2) discourses of operational efficiency are competing with equity-oriented care; (3) the physical spaces of cancer care matter; and (4) experiences of stigma and discrimination are incompatible with accessing cancer care. Our findings suggest that the ways in which cancer services across the continuum are designed, including the types of services available, how care activities are structured, what activities take priority, and how services are experienced, create barriers that particularly impact people experiencing structural marginalization.

conclusionsOur findings highlight the mismatches between how cancer services are currently designed and delivered, and the specific needs of people experiencing health and social inequities. These findings also point to organizations delivering cancer services as potential sites for transformation toward more equitable access to cancer care. Equity-oriented healthcare may offer a framework for service design and delivery to improve access to cancer care and experiences of care.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityNeoplasmsSocial MarginalizationAdultCanadaFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchCancerEquity-oriented health careHealthcare accessHealthcare disparities [MeSH]Health inequities [MeSH]Health services researchSocial determinants of healthStructural marginalizationVulnerable populations [MeSH]

Identifiers

PMID40533755
PMCPMC12177988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.