OBJECTIVE: Compare the characteristics of rural and urban callers to NCI's Cancer Information Service (CIS), and explore the association of geographic location and discussion of cancer clinical trials. METHODS: Using CIS call data from 2006 to 2008, we assigned a rural or urban designation to caller ZIP codes using Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes. Calls which discussed clinical trials were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: The CIS received 227,579 calls from 2006 to 2008 where geographic location could be determined. Overall, 10.3% of calls included a discussion of clinical trials; there were significantly more discussions among urban dwellers than rural individuals (10.5% versus 9.4%, respectively). Multivariate regression analyses supported the univariate findings. In addition, compared to other callers, patients (OR 5.58 [95% CI: 4.88, 6.39]) and family and friends (6.26 [5.48, 71.5]) were significantly more likely to discuss clinical trials. CONCLUSION: Urban callers were more likely than their rural counterparts to discuss cancer treatment trials, placing individuals living in rural areas at a disadvantage in learning about and communicating with their providers about possible participation in clinical trials. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Through its multiple access points, the CIS can serve as an important source of clinical trials information for rural cancer patients, family members, and providers.
OBJECTIVE: Compare the characteristics of rural and urban callers to NCI's Cancer Information Service (CIS), and explore the association of geographic location and discussion of cancer clinical trials. METHODS: Using CIS call data from 2006 to 2008, we assigned a rural or urban designation to caller ZIP codes using Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes. Calls which discussed clinical trials were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: The CIS received 227,579 calls from 2006 to 2008 where geographic location could be determined. Overall, 10.3% of calls included a discussion of clinical trials; there were significantly more discussions among urban dwellers than rural individuals (10.5% versus 9.4%, respectively). Multivariate regression analyses supported the univariate findings. In addition, compared to other callers, patients (OR 5.58 [95% CI: 4.88, 6.39]) and family and friends (6.26 [5.48, 71.5]) were significantly more likely to discuss clinical trials. CONCLUSION: Urban callers were more likely than their rural counterparts to discuss cancer treatment trials, placing individuals living in rural areas at a disadvantage in learning about and communicating with their providers about possible participation in clinical trials. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Through its multiple access points, the CIS can serve as an important source of clinical trials information for rural cancerpatients, family members, and providers.
Authors: J G Ford; M W Howerton; S Bolen; T L Gary; G Y Lai; J Tilburt; M C Gibbons; C Baffi; R F Wilson; C J Feuerstein; P Tanpitukpongse; N R Powe; E B Bass Journal: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) Date: 2005-06
Authors: Jean G Ford; Mollie W Howerton; Gabriel Y Lai; Tiffany L Gary; Shari Bolen; M Chris Gibbons; Jon Tilburt; Charles Baffi; Teerath Peter Tanpitukpongse; Renee F Wilson; Neil R Powe; Eric B Bass Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-01-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Primo N Lara; Debora A Paterniti; Christine Chiechi; Corinne Turrell; Claudia Morain; Nora Horan; Lisa Montell; Jose Gonzalez; Sharon Davis; Ari Umutyan; Cynthia L Martel; David R Gandara; Ted Wun; Laurel A Beckett; Moon S Chen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-12-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kimberly K Engelman; Denise L Perpich; Shelly L Peterson; Matthew A Hall; Edward F Ellerbeck; Annette L Stanton Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2005 Apr-May
Authors: Laura-Mae Baldwin; Yong Cai; Eric H Larson; Sharon A Dobie; George E Wright; David C Goodman; Barbara Matthews; L Gary Hart Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2008 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Lillian Chen; Jackelyn B Payne; Kaylin V Dance; Conner B Imbody; Cathy D Ho; Amy A Ayers; Christopher R Flowers Journal: Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk Date: 2019-10-19
Authors: Lauren M Hamel; Louis A Penner; Terrance L Albrecht; Elisabeth Heath; Clement K Gwede; Susan Eggly Journal: Cancer Control Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 3.302
Authors: Nadine J Barrett; Kearston L Ingraham; Kenisha Bethea; Pao Hwa-Lin; Maritza Chirinos; Laura J Fish; Schenita Randolph; Ping Zhang; Peter Le; Demetrius Harvey; Ronald L Godbee; Steven R Patierno Journal: Adv Cancer Res Date: 2020-03-19 Impact factor: 6.242
Authors: Nadine J Barrett; Elisa M Rodriguez; Ronaldo Iachan; Terry Hyslop; Kearston L Ingraham; Gem M Le; Kelly Martin; Rodney C Haring; Natalie A Rivadeneira; Deborah O Erwin; Laura J Fish; Deirdre Middleton; Robert A Hiatt; Steven R Patierno; Urmimala Sarkar; Elizabeth A Gage-Bouchard Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 6.860