Rebecca J Purc-Stephenson1, Kevin M Gorey. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Ave., Windsor, Ontario, Canada N9B 3X2. purcste@uwindsor.ca
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the association between ethnic minority status and receiving a screening mammogram within the past 2 years among American women over 50. METHOD: The findings from 33 studies identified from interdisciplinary research databases (1980 to 2006) were synthesized. Separate pooled analyses compared white non-Hispanics to African Americans (28 outcomes), Hispanics (18 outcomes), and Asian/Pacific Islanders (10 outcomes). RESULTS: Using the random effects model, results showed that African Americans were screened less than white non-Hispanics at a marginal level (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75, 1.00). Larger and significant discrepancies were observed for Hispanics (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.50, 0.85) and Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.39, 0.99) compared to white non-Hispanics. However, among studies controlling for socioeconomic status, ethnic differences in mammography screening were no longer significant for African Americans (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.71, 1.76), Hispanics (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.64, 1.93), or Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.64, 1.93). Subgroup analyses further showed that geographical region, sampling method, and data collection strategy significantly impacted results. CONCLUSIONS: This study found evidence that ethnic minority-screening mammography differences exist but were impacted by socioeconomic status. Implications for interpreting existing knowledge and future research needs are discussed.
OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the association between ethnic minority status and receiving a screening mammogram within the past 2 years among American women over 50. METHOD: The findings from 33 studies identified from interdisciplinary research databases (1980 to 2006) were synthesized. Separate pooled analyses compared white non-Hispanics to African Americans (28 outcomes), Hispanics (18 outcomes), and Asian/Pacific Islanders (10 outcomes). RESULTS: Using the random effects model, results showed that African Americans were screened less than white non-Hispanics at a marginal level (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75, 1.00). Larger and significant discrepancies were observed for Hispanics (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.50, 0.85) and Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.39, 0.99) compared to white non-Hispanics. However, among studies controlling for socioeconomic status, ethnic differences in mammography screening were no longer significant for African Americans (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.71, 1.76), Hispanics (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.64, 1.93), or Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.64, 1.93). Subgroup analyses further showed that geographical region, sampling method, and data collection strategy significantly impacted results. CONCLUSIONS: This study found evidence that ethnic minority-screening mammography differences exist but were impacted by socioeconomic status. Implications for interpreting existing knowledge and future research needs are discussed.
Authors: Regina Otero-Sabogal; Desi Owens; Jesse Canchola; Jacqueline M Golding; Farzaneh Tabnak; Patrick Fox Journal: J Health Care Poor Underserved Date: 2004-08
Authors: Hannah K Weir; Michael J Thun; Benjamin F Hankey; Lynn A G Ries; Holly L Howe; Phyllis A Wingo; Ahmedin Jemal; Elizabeth Ward; Robert N Anderson; Brenda K Edwards Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2003-09-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Yamile Molina; Jesse J Plascak; Donald L Patrick; Sonia Bishop; Gloria D Coronado; Shirley A A Beresford Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2016-04-08
Authors: Robert S Levine; George S Rust; Maria Pisu; Vincent Agboto; Peter A Baltrus; Nathaniel C Briggs; Roger Zoorob; Paul Juarez; Pamela C Hull; Irwin Goldzweig; Charles H Hennekens Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2010-09-23 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Narissa J Nonzee; Daiva M Ragas; Thanh Ha Luu; Ava M Phisuthikul; Laura Tom; XinQi Dong; Melissa A Simon Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Mandeep K Virk-Baker; Michelle Y Martin; Robert S Levine; Xin Wang; Tim R Nagy; Maria Pisu Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Jenna L Davis; Roberto Ramos; Venessa Rivera-Colón; Myriam Escobar; Jeannette Palencia; Cathy G Grant; B Lee Green Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 2.037