Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 634

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Hospital Volume and Late Survival After Cancer Surgery

Open access
Birkmeyer, John D., Sun, Yating, Wong, Sandra L., Stukel, Therese A.·2007·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

In Brief Context: Although hospital procedure volume is clearly related to operative mortality with many cancer procedures, its effect on late survival is not well characterized. Objective: To examine relationships between hospital volume and late survival after different types of cancer resections. Design: Using the national Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database (1992–2002), we identified all patients undergoing major resections for lung, esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, colon, and bladder cancer (n = 64,047). Relationships between hospital volume and survival were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for patient characteristics and use of adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy. Study Participants: U.S. Medicare patients residing in SEER regions. Main Outcome Measures: 5-year survival. Results: Although there were statistically significant relationships between hospital volume and 5-year survival with all 6 cancer types, the relative importance of volume varied markedly. Absolute differences in 5-year survival probabilities rates between low-volume hospitals (LVHs) and high-volume hospitals (HVHs) ranged from 17% for esophageal cancer resection (17% vs. 34%, respectively) to only 3% for colon cancer resection (45% vs. 48%). Absolute differences in 5-year survival between LVHs and HVHs fell between these ranges for lung (6%), gastric (6%), pancreatic (5%), and bladder cancer (4%). Volume-related differences in late survival could not be attributed to differences in rates of adjuvant therapy. Conclusions: Along with lower operative mortality, HVHs have better late survival rates with selected cancer resections than their lower-volume counterparts. Mechanisms underlying their better outcomes and thus opportunities for improvement remain to be identified. Using the SEER-Medicare database, we identified all patients undergoing major resections for lung, esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, colon, and bladder cancer between 1992 and 1999. Although the magnitude of the volume-outcome effect varied markedly, there were statistically significant relationships between hospital volume and 5-year survival with all 6 cancer types. Volume-related differences in late survival could not be attributed to differences in rates of adjuvant therapy.

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 · 10.1097/01.sla.0000252402.33814.dd

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 634

Metadata

Authors
Birkmeyer, J. D., Sun, Y., Wong, S. L., & Stukel, T. A.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2007-05
Volume
245
Issue
5
Pages
777-783
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1968389730
Cited by
634
References
1
FWCI
91.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Hospital Volume and Late Survival After Cancer Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.sla.0000252402.33814.dd
The paper
Birkmeyer, J. D., Sun, Y., Wong, S. L., & Stukel, T. A. (2007). Hospital Volume and Late Survival After Cancer Surgery. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000252402.33814.dd

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.