ArticleThe Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association2025
Route and efficiency analysis of cancer health care (REACH): Investigating sociodemographic and rurality of metastatic breast cancer patients at an NCI-designated facility.
Article in The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Route and efficiency analysis of cancer health care (REACH): Investigating sociodemographic and rurality of metastatic breast cancer patients at an NCI-designated facility.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 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
purposeBreast cancer is one of the most common malignancies affecting women worldwide. Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients experience unique challenges regarding access to care, particularly rural populations. Geographic location may increase travel, impacting time to treatment and adding to patient burden. This study aimed to evaluate the association between rurality and access to care by examining travel distance, time to treatment, and sociodemographic factors in patients with MBC.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from Siteman Cancer Center (SCC) Oncology Data Services registry from 2011-2021 with 519 female MBC patients. Rurality was defined by state definition. We used Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software to calculate travel distances and times from patients' homes to treatment site. We evaluated travel distance (miles) and time to treatment initiation (days) using t-tests and ANOVA and evaluated any differences based on sociodemographic characteristics.
findingsWe found that rural patients traveled farther for treatment compared to urban patients (mean 87.3 miles vs. 18.0 miles; p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference found with time to treatment initiation between groups (mean 36.1 vs. 35.0 days; p = 0.68). No difference in travel time or treatment initiation was found when comparing sociodemographic factors, including insurance status and comorbidity scores.
conclusionsRural MBC patients face longer travel times, which may contribute to barriers to care. However, we found no difference for time to treatment initiation. Future studies characterizing rural patients' experiences can contribute to the development of targeted interventions to mitigate rural patient burden and improve access to cancer care.
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.