Introduction: To provide equitable cancer care at the end of life, it is essential to first understand the evidence underpinning the existence of unequal cancer outcomes. Study design, measurement and analytical decisions made by researchers are a function of their social systems, academic training, values and biases, which influence both the findings and interpretation of whether inequalities or inequities exist. Methodological choices can lead to results with different implications for research and policy priorities, including where supplementary programmes and services are offered and for whom. The objective of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the methods, including study design, measures and statistical approaches, used in quantitative and qualitative observational studies of health equity in end-of-life cancer care, and to consider how these methods align with recommended approaches for studying health equity questions.

Methods And Analysis: This scoping review follows Arksey and O'Malley's expanded framework for scoping reviews. We will systematically search Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO electronic databases for quantitative and qualitative studies that examined equity stratifiers in relation to end-of-life cancer care and/or outcomes published in English or French between 2010 and 2021. Two authors will independently review all titles, abstracts and full texts to determine which studies meet the inclusion criteria. Data from included full-text articles will be extracted into a data form that will be developed and piloted by the research team. Extracted information will be summarised quantitatively and qualitatively.

Ethics And Dissemination: No ethics approval is required for this scoping review. Results will be disseminated to researchers examining questions of health equity in cancer care through scientific publication and presentation at relevant conferences.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9305817PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064743DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cancer care
20
scoping review
16
end-of-life cancer
12
health equity
12
study design
8
quantitative qualitative
8
cancer
6
will
6
care
5
scoping
5

Similar Publications

Variable relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of carbon radiotherapy may be calculated using several models, including the microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM), stochastic MKM (SMKM), repair-misrepair-fixation (RMF) model, and local effect model I (LEM), which have not been thoroughly compared. In this work, we compared how these four models handle carbon beam fragmentation, providing insight into where model differences arise. Monoenergetic and spread-out Bragg peak carbon beams incident on a water phantom were simulated using Monte Carlo.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

How Outcome Prediction Could Aid Clinical Practice.

Br J Hosp Med (Lond)

January 2025

Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Predictive algorithms have myriad potential clinical decision-making implications from prognostic counselling to improving clinical trial efficiency. Large observational (or "real world") cohorts are a common data source for the development and evaluation of such tools. There is significant optimism regarding the benefits and use cases for risk-based care, but there is a notable disparity between the volume of clinical prediction models published and implementation into healthcare systems that drive and realise patient benefit.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental condition that affects approximately 5% of the pediatric population, with increased prevalence among those with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Reports suggest that unrecognized and untreated ADHD impairs T1D control and that ADHD may be underdiagnosed in the Polish population. The International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes recommends neurodevelopmental assessments in children with T1D, but specific guidelines on procedures and implementation are lacking.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Socio-economic inequalities in second primary cancer incidence: A competing risks analysis of women with breast cancer in England between 2000 and 2018.

Int J Cancer

January 2025

Inequalities in Cancer Outcomes Network (ICON) group, Department of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

We aimed to investigate socio-economic inequalities in second primary cancer (SPC) incidence among breast cancer survivors. Using Data from cancer registries in England, we included all women diagnosed with a first primary breast cancer (PBC) between 2000 and 2018 and aged between 18 and 99 years and followed them up from 6 months after the PBC diagnosis until a SPC event, death, or right censoring, whichever came first. We used flexible parametric survival models adjusting for age and year of PBC diagnosis, ethnicity, PBC tumour stage, comorbidity, and PBC treatments to model the cause-specific hazards of SPC incidence and death according to income deprivation, and then estimated standardised cumulative incidences of SPC by deprivation, taking death as the competing event.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: Pancreatic cancer arising in the context of BRCA predisposition may benefit from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. We analyzed real-world data on the impact of olaparib on survival in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients harboring germline BRCA mutations in Italy, where olaparib is not reimbursed for this indication.

Methods: Clinico/pathological data of pancreatic cancer patients with documented BRCA1-2 germline pathogenic variants who had received first-line chemotherapy for metastatic disease were collected from 23 Italian oncology departments and the impact of olaparib exposure on overall survival (OS) was analyzed.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!