MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411077522 · doi:10.1186/s13690-025-01638-9

Radiotherapy and time to initial treatment following a cancer diagnosis among First Nations Australians: results from a population-based analysis

2025· article· en· W4411077522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sewunet Admasu Belachew, Ming Li, Shafkat Jahan, Siddhartha Baxi, Joan Cunningham, Kalinda Griffiths, Gail Garvey

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research Council
KeywordsHealth services researchHealth informaticsPublic healthMedicineRadiation therapyCancerPopulationHealth administrationCancer treatmentDemographyFamily medicineEnvironmental healthSurgeryNursingInternal medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: First Nations Australians experience poorer cancer outcomes than other Australians. This is attributable to multidimensional factors, including disparities in access to cancer services and treatments. Radiotherapy (RT) is an important component of cancer treatment yet evidence of its utilisation among First Nations Australians is limited. We aimed to examine RT utilisation, time to the treatment, and associated factors in First Nations Peoples diagnosed with cancer in Queensland, Australia. METHODS: First Nations Queenslanders (N = 1884) and other Queenslanders (N = 104,204) diagnosed with any cancer between 1st July 2011 and 30th June 2015 and their RT details between 1st July 2011 and 30th June 2018 were identified using the Cancer CostMod dataset, comprising Queensland Cancer Registry data linked with Queensland Hospital Admitted Patient Data Collection (QHAPDC) and Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS). Analysis was limited to those with non-missing Indigenous status who linked to MBS and/or QHAPDC records (N = 105, 983). Differences in RT utilisation and waiting times by First Nations status were tested using logistic regressions, non-parametric tests, and quantile regression. RESULTS: Among 105, 983 people with a cancer diagnosis in Queensland, 28.6% had RT, with external Beam RT(EBRT) as the predominant type (n = 29,387, 96.9%). One-third (33.5%) of First Nations cancer patients received RT at least once, compared to 28.5% of other Queensland cancer patients (P < 0.001). After adjustment for covariates, First Nations cancer patients had a greater likelihood of RT utilisation than other Queenslanders (adjusted odds ratio(aOR): 1.15; 95% (confidence-interval (CI): 1.04-1.27) and more pronounced within the first year after diagnosis (aOR: 1.23: 95% CI:1.11-1.37). Among those receiving any RT, the median time from cancer diagnosis to first RT was 118 days (Interquartile-range (IQR): 55-232) for First Nations and 132 days (IQR: 59-258) for other Queenslanders (P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: A higher proportion of First Nations cancer patients received RT than other Queensland cancer patients, particularly in the first year following diagnosis. However, RT utilisation for all cancer patients was notably lower (28.6%) than the national optimal RT(EBRT) rate of 48%. This finding highlights the need for RT to align with optimal care standards, which is crucial for improving cancer outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Public HealthSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207