Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41366129›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025

Time from diagnosis to treatment: Are cancer patients who travel for treatment receiving optimal care in Australia?

Susannah K Ayre, Michael Ireland, Alyssa Taglieri-Sclocchi, Xanthia E Bourdaniotis, Sonja March, Fiona Crawford-Williams, Jeff Dunn, Suzanne K Chambers, Belinda C Goodwin, Elizabeth A Johnston

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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. Review
  2. Review
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

10 authors.

Susannah K AyreViertel Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Council Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. s3.ayre@qut.edu.au.
Michael IrelandCentre for Health Research, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield, QLD, Australia.
Alyssa Taglieri-SclocchiViertel Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Council Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Xanthia E BourdaniotisViertel Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Council Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Sonja MarchCentre for Health Research, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield, QLD, Australia.
Fiona Crawford-WilliamsCaring Futures Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Jeff DunnCentre for Health Research, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield, QLD, Australia.
Suzanne K ChambersFaculty of Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Belinda C GoodwinViertel Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Council Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Elizabeth A JohnstonViertel Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Council Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine the prevalence and characteristics of cancer patients in Australia who experienced a delay in starting treatment, according to best practice standards in the Optimal Care Pathways (OCPs).

methodsA cross-sectional analysis was conducted with 640 adults who accessed Cancer Council Queensland subsidised accommodation while receiving cancer care in a major city. Treatment delay was defined as a diagnosis-to-treatment interval exceeding OCP recommendations.

resultsThe median time from diagnosis to treatment was 4.4 weeks (interquartile range: 2.1-8.9 weeks). Of the 494 participants whose data were assessable against OCPs, 199 (40%) experienced a treatment delay. Delay was not associated with age, gender, geographic remoteness, comorbidities, or treatment modality. Participants without private health insurance had higher odds of delay compared to those with insurance (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02-2.78), and participants with breast (aOR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.14-0.74) or skin (aOR = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.09-0.61) cancers had lower odds of delay than those with other cancer types.

conclusionAdherence to OCP recommendations was low compared to the generally accepted quality target of 70-85%, with two in five cancer patients experiencing a delay in commencing treatment. Low adherence to these recommendations underscores the need to strengthen system-wide support and accountability measures, particularly for those facing disparities in access to cancer care related to health insurance status and cancer type.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsTime-to-TreatmentTravelAdultAgedAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInsurance, HealthMaleMiddle AgedQueenslandTime FactorsCancer patientsDelayDiagnosisHealth equityRegional and remoteTreatment

Identifiers

PMID41366129

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.