Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBaade, Peteren_US
dc.contributor.authorChambers, Suzanneen_US
dc.contributor.authorCoory, Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.authorGardiner, Roberten_US
dc.contributor.authorYoulden, Dannyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-04T20:02:13Z
dc.date.available2017-04-04T20:02:13Z
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.identifier.issn0025729Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/41606
dc.description.abstractObjective: To update our previous analysis of trends for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, prostate cancer incidence, radical prostatectomy and prostate cancer mortality to assess whether men in rural and regional areas of Australia now have more equitable access to prostate cancer services, and improved outcomes. Design, setting and participants: Descriptive study using population-based data for Australian men aged 50-79 years from 1982 to the 2008-09 financial year (depending on data availability for each outcome measure). Main outcome measures: Age-standardised rates per 100 000 men and 5-year survival rates. Results: Overall, rates of PSA screening and radical prostatectomy increased, accompanied by reductions in mortality and improvements in survival throughout Australia. Incidence rates were similar for men in urban and rural areas. However, in the last year of data collection, for men in rural areas compared with urban areas, rates of PSA screening (21 267/100 000 v 24 606/100 000; P<0.01) and radical prostatectomy (182.2/100 000 v 239.2/100 000; P<0.01) remained lower, mortality remained higher (56.9/100 000 v 45.8/100 000; P<0.01), and survival outcomes continued to be poorer (5-year relative survival, 87.7% v 91.4%; P<0.01). Conclusions: With some limitations, these ecological data demonstrate that the use of diagnostic and treatment services among men living in rural areas of Australia remains lower than among their urban counterparts, their survival and mortality outcomes are poorer, and these differentials are continuing. There is an urgent need to explore further the reasons for these differences and to implement changes so these inequalities can be reduced.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.format.extent409205 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherAustralasian Medical Publishing Company Pty. Ltd.en_US
dc.publisher.placeAustraliaen_US
dc.publisher.urihttps://www.mja.com.au/journal/2011/194/6/urban-rural-differences-prostate-cancer-outcomes-australia-what-has-changeden_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom293en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto296en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue6en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalMedical Journal of Australiaen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume194en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPsychology not elsewhere classifieden_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode170199en_US
dc.titleUrban-rural differences in prostate cancer outcomes in Australia: what has changed?en_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright 2011 Australasian Medical Publishing Company. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.en_US
gro.date.issued2015-04-20T00:04:46Z
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record