Towards equitable cancer outcomes for rural and remote communities: reflections, lessons and recommendations

People living in rural and remote areas continue to face significant inequities in cancer outcomes compared to their metropolitan counterparts. Despite advances in cancer control, these disparities persist across the cancer trajectory. This personal view consolidates findings from our <i>Equitable Cancer Outcomes for Rural and Remote Communities</i> series, highlighting survival disadvantages, challenges in measuring and reporting rurality, barriers to implementing evidence-based interventions, and shortcomings in historical policy. We argue for place-based, system-level reform that genuinely partners with rural communities, leverages local strengths, and embeds rural voices in research, policy, and service delivery. Key recommendations include adopting a formal partnership position statement to guide collaboration across sectors, strengthening rural data infrastructure, harmonising rural-urban classifications, tailoring implementation strategies, and prioritising geographical equity within cancer policy. Achieving meaningful progress requires coordinated cross-sector action and sustained investment in rural capacity. Equitable cancer outcomes will only be achieved by recognising and addressing the responsibility to deliver best practice care for all people affected by cancer, regardless of where they live.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific
Published
2025-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2025.101756
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.09
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Towards equitable cancer outcomes for rural and remote communities: reflections, lessons and recommendations

Laura Alston, Sharina Riva, Anna Wong Shee, Michèle Conlin et al.
2 citations
The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
2.09
article

Towards equitable cancer outcomes for rural and remote communities: reflections, lessons and recommendations

Laura Alston, Sharina Riva, Anna Wong Shee, Michèle Conlin, Drew Aras, Patricia M. Livingston, Anna Ugalde, Skye Marshall, Cecilia M. O’Kane, Harry Gasper, Helena Rodi, Charlene Wright, Joel Rhee, Theresa Hayes, Elizabeth A. Johnston, Lan Gao, Carl de Wet, Hannah Jongebloed, Anna Chapman, Wasek Faisal, Sze Lin Yoong, Nicole Kiss, Kate M. Gunn, Fiona M. Crawford-Williams, Rebecca J. Bergin, Camille E. Short, Victoria Turner, Ruth Stewart, Anna Boltong, Deme Karikios, Lucy Leigh, Megan Varlow, Florian Honeyball, Rebecca Perry, Kate Whittaker, Nicolas H. Hart, Laura Sergeant, Sophie Boffa
article en
2 citations

Abstract

People living in rural and remote areas continue to face significant inequities in cancer outcomes compared to their metropolitan counterparts. Despite advances in cancer control, these disparities persist across the cancer trajectory. This personal view consolidates findings from our <i>Equitable Cancer Outcomes for Rural and Remote Communities</i> series, highlighting survival disadvantages, challenges in measuring and reporting rurality, barriers to implementing evidence-based interventions, and shortcomings in historical policy. We argue for place-based, system-level reform that genuinely partners with rural communities, leverages local strengths, and embeds rural voices in research, policy, and service delivery. Key recommendations include adopting a formal partnership position statement to guide collaboration across sectors, strengthening rural data infrastructure, harmonising rural-urban classifications, tailoring implementation strategies, and prioritising geographical equity within cancer policy. Achieving meaningful progress requires coordinated cross-sector action and sustained investment in rural capacity. Equitable cancer outcomes will only be achieved by recognising and addressing the responsibility to deliver best practice care for all people affected by cancer, regardless of where they live.

The Lancet Regional Health - Western PacificVol. 66
University of Technology Sydney (AU), Edith Cowan University (AU), The University of Sydney (AU), Queensland Health (AU), Barwon Health (AU), Deakin University (AU), Queensland University of Technology (AU), The University of Queensland (AU), The University of Melbourne (AU), Flinders University (AU), University of South Australia (AU), University of Southern Queensland (AU), Cancer Council Queensland (AU), La Trobe University (AU), Queensland Government (AU), Nepean Hospital (AU), Cancer Institute of New South Wales (AU), UNSW Sydney (AU), Cancer Australia (AU), Hunter Medical Research Institute (AU), Children’s Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service (AU), Department of Health and Human Services (AU), NHS Grampian (GB), Noosa Hospital (AU), Dubbo Hospital (AU), Sunshine Coast University Hospital (AU), Western NSW Local Health District (AU), Ballarat Health Services (AU), Regional Cancer Center (US), Monash Health (AU), Alliance College of Australia (AU), South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (AU), Melbourne Health (AU), Monash University (AU), University of Newcastle Australia (AU), The University of Notre Dame Australia (AU), Cancer Council Australia (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
2.09
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.