Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 386

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Health Care of Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

Open access
Oeffinger, K. C.·2004·The Annals of Family Medicine
DOI 10.1370/afm.26
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We wanted to determine the type of outpatient medical care reported by young adult survivors of childhood cancer and to examine factors associated with limited medical care. METHODS: We analyzed data from 9,434 adult childhood cancer survivors enrolled in a retrospective cohort study who completed a baseline questionnaire. They had a mean age of 26.8 years (range 18 to 48 years), 47% were female, 12% were minorities, and 16% were uninsured. Four self-reported outcome measures were used to determine outpatient medical care in a 2-year period: general contact with the health care system, general physical examination, cancer-related medical visit, and medical visit at a cancer center. RESULTS: Eighty-seven percent reported general medical contact, 71.4% a general physical examination, 41.9% a cancer-related visit, and 19.2%, a visit at a cancer center. Factors associated with not reporting a general physical examination, a cancer-related visit, or a cancer center visit included no health insurance (odds ratio [OR] = 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.97-2.77), male sex (OR = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.44-1.88), lack of concern for future health (OR = 1.57; 95% CI, 1.36-1.82), and age 30 years or older in comparison with those 18 to 29 years (OR = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.35-1.81). The likelihood of reporting a cancer-related visit or a general physical examination decreased significantly as the survivor aged or the time from cancer diagnosis increased. This trend was also significant for those treated with therapies associated with substantial risk for cardiovascular disease or breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians provide health care for most of this growing high-risk population. To optimize risk-based care, it is critical that cancer centers and primary care physicians develop methods to communicate effectively and longitudinally.

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 · 10.1370/afm.26

Cites

41 of 41 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

Cited by

See all 386

Metadata

Authors
Oeffinger, K. C.
Venue
The Annals of Family Medicine
Publisher
Annals of Family Medicine
Published
2004-01-01
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
61-70
ISSN
  • 1544-1709 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-1717
DOI
10.1370/afm.26
OpenAlex
W2135459704
Cited by
386
References
41
FWCI
15.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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

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.