Literature DB >> 17950403

Breast cancer screening and incidence in communities with a high proportion of uninsured.

Mario Schootman1, Mark S Walker, Donna B Jeffe, James E Rohrer, Elizabeth A Baker.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Research has not established (1) if breast cancer screening varies by county-level proportion of uninsured or (2) whether county-level-proportion of uninsured correlates with county-level early-stage and late-stage breast cancer incidence.
METHODS: A multilevel study was conducted to determine if individual-level self-reported breast cancer screening data from the 2000 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) was associated with county-level-proportion-uninsured data from the 1999-2001 BRFSS. An ecologic study was conducted to determine if county-level proportion of uninsured correlated with incidence of early-stage and late-stage breast cancer using the 1999-2001 BRFSS data from the overlapping counties in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. Data were analyzed in 2005.
RESULTS: Women were less likely to be screened (prevalence odds ratio: 0.95; 95% confidence interval=0.93-0.97) with every 5% increasing county-level proportion of uninsured. African-American and Hispanic women who resided in counties with a proportion of uninsured of 9%-19% had higher screening utilization than white non-Hispanic women. The county-level-proportion of uninsured had little effect on screening use among women with household incomes less than $25,000 or greater than $75,000. Screening prevalence decreased with increasing county-level proportion of uninsured among women with intermediate income. The rate of T1 (<2 cm diameter) tumors decreased with increasing county-level proportion of uninsured while controlling for poverty rate; Spearman correlation -0.294.
CONCLUSIONS: High county-level proportions of uninsured may lead to lower early-stage breast-cancer incidence through lower screening use among women living in these less-well-insured counties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17950403      PMCID: PMC2100034          DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2007.07.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Prev Med        ISSN: 0749-3797            Impact factor:   5.043


  19 in total

1.  Psychosocial factors associated with the use of breast cancer screening by women age 60 years or over.

Authors:  R Michielutte; M B Dignan; B L Smith
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  1999-10

2.  Re: "Neighborhood environment and loss of physical function in older adults: evidence from the Alameda County Study".

Authors:  Timothy L Lash; Aliza K Fink
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2003-03-01       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Racial/ethnic differences in the self-reported use of screening mammography.

Authors:  Alma R Jones; Lee S Caplan; Mary Kidd Davis
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2003-10

4.  Unmet health needs of uninsured adults in the United States.

Authors:  J Z Ayanian; J S Weissman; E C Schneider; J A Ginsburg; A M Zaslavsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-10-25       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Mobility impairments and use of screening and preventive services.

Authors:  L I Iezzoni; E P McCarthy; R B Davis; H Siebens
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Meeting the mammography screening needs of underserved women: the performance of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program in 2002-2003 (United States).

Authors:  Florence K L Tangka; Joseph Dalaker; Sajal K Chattopadhyay; James G Gardner; Janet Royalty; Ingrid J E Hall; Amy DeGroff; Donald K Blackman; Ralph J Coates
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 2.506

7.  The full potential of breast cancer screening use to reduce mortality has not yet been realized in the United States.

Authors:  Mario Schootman; Donna Jeffe; Anat Reschke; Rebecca Aft
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  Race/ethnicity, gender, and monitoring socioeconomic gradients in health: a comparison of area-based socioeconomic measures--the public health disparities geocoding project.

Authors:  Nancy Krieger; Jarvis T Chen; Pamela D Waterman; David H Rehkopf; S V Subramanian
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Access to medical care for low-income persons: how do communities make a difference?

Authors:  Ronald M Andersen; Hongjian Yu; Roberta Wyn; Pamela L Davidson; E Richard Brown; Stephanie Teleki
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.929

10.  Breast cancer screening programmes: the development of a monitoring and evaluation system.

Authors:  N E Day; D R Williams; K T Khaw
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  14 in total

1.  A comparison of breast and cervical cancer legislation and screening in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

Authors:  Stephanie Miles-Richardson; Daniel Blumenthal; Ernest Alema-Mensah
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2012-05

2.  Referrals among cancer services organizations serving underserved cancer patients in an urban area.

Authors:  Jenine K Harris; Julianne Cyr; Bobbi J Carothers; Nancy B Mueller; Victoria V Anwuri; Aimee I James
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Barriers on Breast Cancer Early Detection Methods.

Authors:  Yasemin Erkal Aksoy; Esin Çeber Turfan; Ebru Sert; Gülengül Mermer
Journal:  J Breast Health       Date:  2015-01-01

4.  Impact of insurance type on survivor-focused and general preventive health care utilization in adult survivors of childhood cancer: the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS).

Authors:  Jacqueline Casillas; Sharon M Castellino; Melissa M Hudson; Ann C Mertens; Isac S F Lima; Qi Liu; Lonnie K Zeltzer; Yutaka Yasui; Leslie L Robison; Kevin C Oeffinger
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Neighborhood composition and cancer among Hispanics: tumor stage and size at time of diagnosis.

Authors:  Carlos A Reyes-Ortiz; Karl Eschbach; Dong D Zhang; James S Goodwin
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  An ecological analysis of the incidence of invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix in Hispanic women in the United States.

Authors:  Kristy K Ward; Angelica M Roncancio; Miguel Angel Cano; Steven C Plaxe
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.847

7.  Racial disparities in breast cancer survival: an analysis by age and stage.

Authors:  Anjali D Deshpande; Donna B Jeffe; Jennifer Gnerlich; Ayesha Z Iqbal; Abhishek Thummalakunta; Julie A Margenthaler
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2008-06-23       Impact factor: 2.192

8.  Association between hormone receptors and HER-2/neu is age-related.

Authors:  Bo Wang; Xiaoling Wang; Yinying Zou
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2015-07-01

Review 9.  Association of area socioeconomic status and breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sandi L Pruitt; Matthew J Shim; Patricia Dolan Mullen; Sally W Vernon; Benjamin C Amick
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Socioeconomic disparities in breast cancer survival: relation to stage at diagnosis, treatment and race.

Authors:  Xue Qin Yu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.