Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 176

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Stage at Diagnosis and Treatment Patterns Among Older Women With Breast Cancer: An HMO and Fee-for-Service Comparison

Riley, Gerald F.·1999·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Few studies have compared patterns of care in health maintenance organization (HMO) and fee-for-service (FFS) settings. OBJECTIVE: To examine breast cancer stage at diagnosis and, for those at an early stage, treatment patterns for elderly women in HMO and FFS settings. DESIGN: Cancer registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program linked to Medicare enrollment records. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 65 years or older residing in 11 geographic areas who were newly diagnosed as having breast cancer between 1988 and 1993. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Standardized percentage of cases diagnosed at late stages for HMO vs FFS; standardized percentage of early-stage cases undergoing initial treatment with breast-conserving surgery (BCS); and, among BCS cases, standardized percentage receiving adjuvant radiation therapy. Standardization was achieved through logistic regression, controlling for patient demographics, cancer history, county of residence, year of diagnosis, and educational attainment at the census tract level. Analyses of treatment patterns were controlled for stage at diagnosis and tumor size. RESULTS: The HMO enrollees were less likely to have breast cancer diagnosed at late stages than FFS patients (HMO, 7.6%; FFS, 10.8%; difference, -3.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), -4.2% to -2.2 %]). Among early-stage cases, the percentages undergoing BCS were similar in HMO and FFS settings overall (HMO, 38.4%; FFS, 36.8%; difference, 1.6% [95% CI, 0.0%-3.2%]); percentages varied markedly at the individual plan level. Among women undergoing BCS, HMO enrollees were significantly more likely to receive radiation therapy but, again, results varied by plan (HMO, 69.0%; FFS, 63.7%; difference, 5.3% [95% CI, 2.9%-7.7%]). In general, use of BCS and radiation therapy was substantially higher than that found in an earlier study examining cases diagnosed between 1985 and 1989. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of early-stage breast cancer in HMOs often differs from local FFS patterns, but not in a consistent way. During the period of our study, elderly HMO enrollees did not appear to have systematic access problems with adjuvant radiation therapy following BCS compared with women in an FFS setting.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.281.8.720

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 176

Metadata

Authors
Riley, G. F.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1999-02-24
Volume
281
Issue
8
Pages
720
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2068693539
Cited by
176
References
3
FWCI
6.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Stage at Diagnosis and Treatment Patterns Among Older Women With Breast Cancer: An HMO and Fee-for-Service Comparison. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.281.8.720
The paper
Riley, G. F. (1999). Stage at Diagnosis and Treatment Patterns Among Older Women With Breast Cancer: An HMO and Fee-for-Service Comparison. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.281.8.720

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.