Elizabeth S Nagelhout1, Bridget G Parsons2, Benjamin Haaland2,3, Kenneth P Tercyak4, Kelsey Zaugg2, Angela Zhu2, Garrett Harding2, Jeffrey Yancey2, Jakob D Jensen5, Douglas Grossman2,6,7, David W Wetter2, Yelena P Wu8,9. 1. Division of Public Health, Department of Family & Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, 375 Chipeta Way, Suite A, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA. 2. Huntsman Cancer Institute, 2000 Circle of Hope, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. 3. Division of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA. 4. Cancer Prevention & Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, 3300 Whitehaven Street, NW, Suite 4100, Washington, DC, 20007, USA. 5. Department of Communication, University of Utah, 255 Central Campus Dr #2400, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. 6. Department of Oncological Sciences, University of Utah, 201 Presidents Circle, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. 7. Department of Dermatology, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, 4A330, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. 8. Huntsman Cancer Institute, 2000 Circle of Hope, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. Yelena.Wu@utah.edu. 9. Department of Dermatology, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, 4A330, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. Yelena.Wu@utah.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate differences in reported use of sun protection, tanning behaviors, skin cancer-related knowledge, and perceived risk between rural and urban high school students in a geographic area with high rates of melanoma. METHODS: A total of 1,570 high school students (56.8% female) from urban (6 schools) and rural (7 schools) geographic areas in Utah completed questionnaires assessing sun protection and tanning behaviors, skin cancer-related knowledge, and perceived risk for skin cancer. Analyses examined potential differences in these outcomes between rural and urban students and by gender. RESULTS: Compared to students in urban areas, those in rural areas had lower odds of wearing sunscreen (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.53, 0.95; p = 0.022), re-applying sunscreen (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.74, 1.02; p = 0.002), wearing long-sleeved shirts (OR 0.63 95% CI 0.46, 0.86; p = 0.004), and seeking shade (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.50, 0.88; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Rural students reported less adequate use of sun protection than urban students. Rural male students reported lower knowledge scores compared to urban males. Future skin cancer prevention efforts targeting rural high schoolers are warranted.
PURPOSE: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate differences in reported use of sun protection, tanning behaviors, skin cancer-related knowledge, and perceived risk between rural and urban high school students in a geographic area with high rates of melanoma. METHODS: A total of 1,570 high school students (56.8% female) from urban (6 schools) and rural (7 schools) geographic areas in Utah completed questionnaires assessing sun protection and tanning behaviors, skin cancer-related knowledge, and perceived risk for skin cancer. Analyses examined potential differences in these outcomes between rural and urban students and by gender. RESULTS: Compared to students in urban areas, those in rural areas had lower odds of wearing sunscreen (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.53, 0.95; p = 0.022), re-applying sunscreen (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.74, 1.02; p = 0.002), wearing long-sleeved shirts (OR 0.63 95% CI 0.46, 0.86; p = 0.004), and seeking shade (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.50, 0.88; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Rural students reported less adequate use of sun protection than urban students. Rural male students reported lower knowledge scores compared to urban males. Future skin cancer prevention efforts targeting rural high schoolers are warranted.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer prevention; Health education; Rural health; Skin cancer
Authors: H K Koh; S M Bak; A C Geller; T W Mangione; R W Hingson; S M Levenson; D R Miller; R A Lew; J Howland Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 1997-07 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Whitney E Zahnd; Aimee S James; Wiley D Jenkins; Sonya R Izadi; Amanda J Fogleman; David E Steward; Graham A Colditz; Laurent Brard Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2017-07-27 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Karen Glanz; Frances McCarty; Eric J Nehl; David L O'Riordan; Peter Gies; Lucja Bundy; Adam E Locke; Dawn M Hall Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2008-10-21 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: S Jane Henley; Robert N Anderson; Cheryll C Thomas; Greta M Massetti; Brandy Peaker; Lisa C Richardson Journal: MMWR Surveill Summ Date: 2017-07-07
Authors: Jakob D Jensen; Manusheela Pokharel; Andy J King; Kevin K John; Yelena P Wu; Douglas Grossman Journal: Psychol Health Med Date: 2019-12-17 Impact factor: 2.423
Authors: Yelena P Wu; Bridget Parsons; Yeonjung Jo; Jonathan Chipman; Benjamin Haaland; Elizabeth S Nagelhout; James Carrington; Ali P Wankier; Hannah Brady; Douglas Grossman Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2022-07-21