F Benjamin Zhan1, Yan Lin2. 1. Texas Center for Geographic Information Science, Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas. 2. Texas Center for Geographic Information Science, Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas. Electronic address: yl1028@txstate.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advanced-stage diagnosis is among the primary causes of mortality among cervical cancer patients. With the wide use of Pap smear screening, cervical cancer advanced-stage diagnosis rates have decreased. However, disparities of advanced-stage diagnosis persist among different population groups. A challenging task in cervical cancer disparity reduction is to identify where underserved population groups are. METHODS: Based on cervical cancer incidence data between 1995 and 2008, this study investigated advanced-stage cervical cancer disparities in Texas from three social domains: Race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and geographic location. Effects of individual and contextual factors, including age, tumor grade, race/ethnicity, as well as contextual SES, spatial access to health care, sociocultural factors, percentage of African Americans, and insurance expenditures, on these disparities were examined using multilevel logistic regressions. FINDINGS: Significant variations by race/ethnicity and SES were found in cervical cancer advanced-stage diagnosis. We also found a decline in racial/ethnic disparities of advanced cervical cancer diagnosis rate from 1995 to 2008. However, the progress was slower among African Americans than Hispanics. Geographic disparities could be explained by age, race/ethnicity, SES, and the percentage of African Americans in a census tract. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings have important implications for developing effective cervical cancer screening and control programs. We identified the location of underserved populations who need the most assistance with cervical cancer screening. Cervical cancer intervention programs should target Hispanics and African Americans, as well as individuals from communities with lower SES in geographic areas where higher advanced-stage diagnosis rates were identified in this study.
BACKGROUND: Advanced-stage diagnosis is among the primary causes of mortality among cervical cancerpatients. With the wide use of Pap smear screening, cervical cancer advanced-stage diagnosis rates have decreased. However, disparities of advanced-stage diagnosis persist among different population groups. A challenging task in cervical cancer disparity reduction is to identify where underserved population groups are. METHODS: Based on cervical cancer incidence data between 1995 and 2008, this study investigated advanced-stage cervical cancer disparities in Texas from three social domains: Race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and geographic location. Effects of individual and contextual factors, including age, tumor grade, race/ethnicity, as well as contextual SES, spatial access to health care, sociocultural factors, percentage of African Americans, and insurance expenditures, on these disparities were examined using multilevel logistic regressions. FINDINGS: Significant variations by race/ethnicity and SES were found in cervical cancer advanced-stage diagnosis. We also found a decline in racial/ethnic disparities of advanced cervical cancer diagnosis rate from 1995 to 2008. However, the progress was slower among African Americans than Hispanics. Geographic disparities could be explained by age, race/ethnicity, SES, and the percentage of African Americans in a census tract. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings have important implications for developing effective cervical cancer screening and control programs. We identified the location of underserved populations who need the most assistance with cervical cancer screening. Cervical cancer intervention programs should target Hispanics and African Americans, as well as individuals from communities with lower SES in geographic areas where higher advanced-stage diagnosis rates were identified in this study.
Authors: Yolanda J McDonald; Daniel W Goldberg; Isabel C Scarinci; Philip E Castle; Jack Cuzick; Michael Robertson; Cosette M Wheeler Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Monica M Brackney; Daniel M Weinberger; Kyle Higgins; James Meek; Linda M Niccolai Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2021-11-02 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Michael D Toboni; Alexander Cohen; Zachary L Gentry; Stuart A Ostby; Zhixin Wang; Sejong Bae; Charles Leath Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 4.661
Authors: Tyra T Gross; Mahbubur Rahman; Abigail M Wright; Jacqueline M Hirth; Kwabena O Sarpong; Richard E Rupp; Alan D Barrett; Abbey B Berenson Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2016-11