SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Exploring disparities in adherence to colorectal cancer clinical practice guidelines and associated survival outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeColorectal cancer (CRC) remains a major global health burden, where adherence to evidence-based guidelines is critical for improving patient outcomes. This systematic review aimed at synthesising the effects of structural and systemic barriers on CRC clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommendations, adherence, and treatment outcomes, drawing on real-world evidence.
methodsThis systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024621251). Literature was searched in Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane from inception to 26 May 2026. Eligible studies included cohort and observational studies comparing CRC patients managed according to CPG adherence versus non-adherence recommendations. Primary outcomes were adherence rates and overall survival. Pooled analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.
resultsOf 4,262 initially identified citations, 95 met the inclusion criteria, and 30 were included in the meta-analysis. Adherence shows heterogeneous, tumour-stage-specific associations with survival, though effects varied by tumour site, disease stage, and treatment modality. Non-adherence was more common among patients of advancing age and those facing structural disadvantage, including socioeconomic strata, non-white ethnicity, and treatment in non-accredited facilities. Across all tumour sites, adherence to CPGs was associated with a non-significant survival benefit [Risk Ratio (RR) = 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI = 0.67-1.20; heterogeneity I
conclusionDisparities in guideline adherence reflect structural and systemic disparities in cancer care delivery. These findings underscore the need to address barriers that contribute to non-adherence, particularly among identified high-risk populations and within the health-care system, to support more equitable guideline-adherent care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42684532What 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.