Cited by 144Health disparities and outcomesGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningRacial and Ethnic Identity Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 125 of the 125 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Racial Differences and Disparities in Cancer Care and Outcomes

Open access
Esnaola, Nestor F., Ford, Marvella E.·2012·Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America

Abstract

Despite a profusion of studies over the past several years documenting racial differences in cancer outcomes, there is a paucity of data as to the root causes underlying these observations. This article reviews work to date focusing on black-white differences in cancer outcomes, explores potential mechanisms underlying these differences, and identifies patient, physician, and health care system factors that may account for persistent racial disparities in cancer care. Research strategies to elucidate the relative influence of these various factors and policy recommendations to reduce persistent disparities are also discussed.

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 · 10.1016/j.soc.2012.03.012

Cites

125 of 125 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Esnaola, N. F., & Ford, M. E.
Affiliations
Medical University of South Carolina (US)
Venue
Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-07
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
417-437
ISSN
1055-3207 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1955890750
Cited by
144
References
125
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (P20CA157071)
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (R01MD005892)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
Keywords
racial disparities, cancer care, black-white disparities, oncological outcomes, health care access, health system factors, physician characteristics, patient factors, health policy, health equity
MeSH terms
Black or African American, Female, Humans, Male, Neoplasms, Prognosis, Quality of Health Care, Risk Factors, United States, Incidence, White People, Healthcare Disparities, Delayed Diagnosis

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