ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2026
Associations of surgical breast cancer treatment at regional or community hospitals with patient-reported experience measures.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeHigh-volume hospitals deliver improved outcomes for patients with breast cancer, supporting referrals for breast cancer surgical care to high-volume regional facilities. This retrospective cohort study investigated how multidisciplinary cancer care trajectories and patient care experiences varied by surgical facility classification (regional vs. community as a proxy for high- vs. low-volume) and whether effects differed by rural-residence.
methodsWe used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (SEER-CAHPS) data for Medicare beneficiaries who received surgery for non-metastatic breast cancer from 2009 to 2019. We mapped cancer care trajectories using facility classification and oncologist specialty and performed state sequence analysis to identify care trajectory clusters. We used linear mixed-effects models to examine associations of surgical facility classification with patient-reported experience measures and assessed effect modification by rurality.
resultsOf the 3,327 patients in our cohort, 15.4% were rural-residing and 68.8% received surgery at a regional facility. Care trajectories indicated that patients tended to receive adjuvant care from the same type of facility as their surgical treatment. Patients who received surgery at community facilities (vs. regional) were significantly more likely to report better experiences with getting needed care (Est. (95%CI) = 3.5 (0.10,6.9), p = 0.043), with no significant differences for getting care quickly, care coordination, or doctor communication. Rural-residence was not a significant effect modifier.
conclusionReceiving surgery at community facilities is associated with better patient-reported experiences for getting needed care. Moreover, surgical facility classification appears to influence the setting for subsequent cancer care, which may impact patient experiences in getting needed care. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.