Literature DB >> 9772849

Targeting the underserved for breast and cervical cancer screening: the utility of ecological analysis using the National Health Interview Survey.

B L Wells1, J W Horm.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study tested the utility of ecological variables created from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for strategic targeting of health services for the underserved.
METHODS: Ecological variables were created using the 1989-1991 survey years of the NHIS public use data files. Segments, the NHIS secondary sampling units, permit computation of secondary sampling characteristics by percentage Black, percentage Hispanic, percentage below poverty, percentage unemployed, median education, median income, median age, and percentage residing in the United States for 5 years or less. These variables were analyzed with the NHIS Health Promotion and Disease Prevention 1990 supplement reporting mammogram, clinical breast examination, and Pap test use.
RESULTS: Median education of areas was inversely related to never having mammograms. Areas with a high proportion (70%-100%) of Hispanic respondents also were more likely not to have mammograms. Women residing in areas with moderate or high proportions of Hispanic respondents were more likely never to have clinical breast examinations and Pap tests, as were those in areas with low income, poverty, and respondents who had resided in the United States 5 years or less.
CONCLUSIONS: The new methodology of constructing ecological variables using the NHIS demonstrates an application that may help identify underserved areas or areas with underutilized services. More studies using this methodology are warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9772849      PMCID: PMC1508482          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.88.10.1484

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  8 in total

1.  Cervical cancer screening: who is not screened and why?

Authors:  L C Harlan; A B Bernstein; L G Kessler
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Demographic predictors of mammography and Pap smear screening in US women.

Authors:  E E Calle; W D Flanders; M J Thun; L M Martin
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  The logic in ecological: I. The logic of analysis.

Authors:  M Susser
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Pap smear and mammogram screening in Mexican-American women: the effects of acculturation.

Authors:  L Suarez
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Using census and mortality data to target small areas for breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  H F Andrews; J F Kerner; A G Zauber; J Mandelblatt; J Pittman; E Struening
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Additional ecological evidence: lipids and breast cancer mortality among women aged 55 and over in China.

Authors:  J R Marshall; Y Qu; J Chen; B Parpia; T C Campbell
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 9.162

7.  The effect of physician-patient communication on mammography utilization by different ethnic groups.

Authors:  S A Fox; J A Stein
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Stage at diagnosis in breast cancer: race and socioeconomic factors.

Authors:  B L Wells; J W Horm
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 9.308

  8 in total
  30 in total

1.  Geographic socioeconomic status, race, and advanced-stage breast cancer in New York City.

Authors:  Sharon Stein Merkin; Lori Stevenson; Neil Powe
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Predicting patterns of mammography use: a geographic perspective on national needs for intervention research.

Authors:  Julie Legler; Nancy Breen; Helen Meissner; Don Malec; Cathy Coyne
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Breast and cervical cancer screening among Latinas and non-Latina whites.

Authors:  Ana F Abraído-Lanza; Maria T Chao; Marilie D Gammon
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  State-based estimates of mammography screening rates based on information from two health surveys.

Authors:  William W Davis; Van L Parsons; Dawei Xie; Nathaniel Schenker; Machell Town; Trivellore E Raghunathan; Eric J Feuer
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.792

5.  Participation and program outcomes in a church-based cancer prevention program for Hispanic women.

Authors:  Vera A Lopez; Felipe G Castro
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2006-08

6.  Spatial equity in facilities providing low- or no-fee screening mammography in Chicago neighborhoods.

Authors:  Shannon N Zenk; Elizabeth Tarlov; Jiaming Sun
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.671

Review 7.  The social epidemiologic concept of fundamental cause.

Authors:  Andrew Ward
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2008-03-13

8.  Mortality from breast carcinoma among US women: the role and implications of socio-economics, heterogeneous insurance, screening mammography, and geography.

Authors:  Albert A Okunade; Mustafa C Karakus
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2003-11

9.  Medicaid status and stage at diagnosis of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Cynthia D O'Malley; Sarah J Shema; Lisa S Clarke; Christina A Clarke; Carin I Perkins
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  Geographic methods for understanding and responding to disparities in mammography use in Toronto, Canada.

Authors:  Richard Henry Glazier; Maria Isabella Creatore; Piotr Gozdyra; Flora I Matheson; Leah S Steele; Eleanor Boyle; Rahim Moineddin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.