Dataset Information

Social determinants of breast cancer in the Caribbean: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the Caribbean and accounts for >1 million disability adjusted life years. Little is known about the social inequalities of this disease in the Caribbean. In support of the Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequities, this article presents a systematic review of evidence on the distribution, by social determinants, of breast cancer risk factors, frequency, and adverse outcomes in Caribbean women.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, CINAHL, CUMED, LILACS, and IBECS were searched for observational studies reporting associations between social determinants and breast cancer risk factors, frequency, or outcomes. Based on the PROGRESS-plus checklist, we considered 8 social determinant groups for 14 breast cancer endpoints, which totalled to 189 possible ways ('relationship groups') to explore the role of social determinants on breast cancer. Studies with >50 participants conducted in Caribbean territories between 2004 and 2014 were eligible for inclusion. The review was conducted according to STROBE and PRISMA guidelines and results were planned as a narrative synthesis, with meta-analysis if possible.

Results

Thirty-four articles were included from 5,190 screened citations. From these included studies, 75 inequality relationships were reported examining 30 distinct relationship groups, leaving 84% of relationship groups unexplored. Most inequality relationships were reported for risk factors, particularly alcohol and overweight/obesity which generally showed a positive relationship with indicators of lower socioeconomic position. Evidence for breast cancer frequency and outcomes was scarce. Unmarried women tended to have a higher likelihood of being diagnosed with breast cancer when compared to married women. While no association was observed between breast cancer frequency and ethnicity, mortality from breast cancer was shown to be slightly higher among Asian-Indian compared to African-descent populations in Trinidad (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4) and Guyana (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6).

Conclusion

Study quantity, quality, and variability in outcomes and reporting limited the synthesis of evidence on the role of social determinants on breast cancer in the Caribbean. This report represents important current evidence on the region, and can guide future research priorities for better describing and understanding of Caribbean breast cancer inequalities.

SUBMITTER: Brown CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5382386 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Social determinants of breast cancer in the Caribbean: a systematic review.

Brown Catherine R CR Hambleton Ian R IR Hercules Shawn M SM Alvarado Miriam M Unwin Nigel N Murphy Madhuvanti M MM Harris E Nigel EN Wilks Rainford R MacLeish Marlene M Sullivan Louis L Sobers-Grannum Natasha N

International journal for equity in health 20170405 1

<h4>Background</h4>Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the Caribbean and accounts for >1 million disability adjusted life years. Little is known about the social inequalities of this disease in the Caribbean. In support of the Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequities, this article presents a systematic review of evidence on the distribution, by social determinants, of breast cancer risk factors, frequency, and adverse outcomes in Caribbean women.<h ...[more]

PMID: 28381227

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer remains the leading cause of cancer deaths among Caribbean men. However, little data exists on the influence of social factors on prostate cancer in the Caribbean setting. This article supports the 2011 Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequalities by presenting a systematic review of evidence on the role of social determinants on prostate cancer in Caribbean men. It aims to determine the distribution, by known social determinants of health, of the frequency and adverse outcomes of prostate cancer among Caribbean populations.MethodsObservational studies reporting an association between a social determinant and prostate cancer frequency and outcomes were sought in MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, CINAHL, CUMED, LILACS, and IBECS databases. Fourteen social determinants and 7 prostate cancer endpoints were chosen, providing 98 possible relationship groups exploring the role of social determinants on prostate cancer. Observational studies with > 50 participants conducted in Caribbean territories between 2004 and 2016 were eligible. The review was conducted according to STROBE and PRISMA guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed.ResultsFrom 843 potentially relevant citations, 13 articles from 9 studies were included. From these included studies, 24 relationships were reported looking at 11 distinct relationship groups, leaving 90 relationship groups (92% of all relationship groups) unexplored. Study heterogeneity and risk of bias restricted results to a narrative synthesis in most instances. Meta-analyses showed more diagnosed prostate cancer among men with less formal education (n = 2 studies, OR 1.60, 95%CI 1.18-2.19) and among men who were married (n = 3 studies, OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.22-1.95).ConclusionsThis review highlights limited evidence for a higher occurrence of diagnosed prostate cancer among Caribbean men with lower levels of education and among men who are married. The role of social determinants on prostate cancer among Caribbean men remains poorly understood. Improvements in study quantity and quality, and reduced variability in outcomes and reporting are needed. This report represents the current evidence, and provides a roadmap to future research priorities for a better understanding of Caribbean prostate cancer inequalities.

Project description:BackgroundDepressive disorder is the largest contributor to years lived with disability in the Caribbean, adding 948 per 100,000 in 2013. Depression is also a major risk factor for suicidal behaviour. Social inequalities influence the occurrence of depression, yet little is known about the social inequalities of this condition in the Caribbean. In support of the 2011 Rio Political Declaration on addressing health inequities, this article presents a systematic review of the role of social determinants on depression and its suicidal behaviours in the Caribbean.MethodsEight databases were searched for observational studies reporting associations between social determinants and depression frequency, severity, or outcomes. Based on the PROGRESS-plus checklist, we considered 9 social determinant groups (of 15 endpoints) for 6 depression endpoints, totalling 90 possible ways ('relationship groups') to explore the role of social determinants on depression. Studies with ≥50 participants conducted in Caribbean territories between 2004 and 2014 were eligible. The review was conducted according to STROBE and PRISMA guidelines. Results were planned as a narrative synthesis, with meta-analysis if possible.ResultsFrom 3951 citations, 55 articles from 45 studies were included. Most were classified as serious risk of bias. Fifty-seven relationship groups were reported by the 55 included articles, leaving 33 relationship groups (37%) without an evidence base. Most associations were reported for gender, age, residence, marital status, and education. Depression, its severity, and its outcomes were more common among females (except suicide which was more common among males), early and middle adolescents (among youth), and those with lower levels of education. Marriage emerged as both a risk and protective factor for depression score and prevalence, while several inequality relationships in Haiti were in contrast to typical trends.ConclusionThe risk of bias and few numbers of studies within relationship groups restricted the synthesis of Caribbean evidence on social inequalities of depression. Along with more research focusing on regional social inequalities, attempts at standardizing reporting guidelines for observational studies of inequality and studies examining depression is necessitated. This review offers as a benchmark to prioritize future research into the social determinants of depression frequency and outcomes in the Caribbean.

Project description:ImportanceScreening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers in the United States has remained below the Healthy People 2020 goals, with evidence indicating that persistent screening disparities still exist. The US Department of Health and Human Services has emphasized cross-sectoral collaboration in aligning social determinants of health with public health and medical services. Examining the economics of intervening through these novel methods in the realm of cancer screening can inform program planners, health care providers, implementers, and policy makers.ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations of interventions leveraging social determinants of health to improve screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer to guide implementation.Evidence reviewA systematic literature search for economic evidence was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Global Health, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, Business Source Complete, EconLit, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), and Sociological Abstracts from January 1, 2004, to November 25, 2019. Included studies intervened on social determinants of health to improve breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in the United States and reported intervention cost, incremental cost per additional person screened, and/or incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Risk of bias was assessed along with qualitative assessment of quality to ensure complete reporting of economic measures, data sources, and analytic methods. In addition, included studies with modeled outcomes had to define structural elements and sources for input parameters, distinguish between programmatic and literature-derived data, and assess uncertainty.FindingsThirty unique articles with 94 706 real and 4.21 million simulated participants satisfied our inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The median intervention cost per participant was $123.87 (interquartile interval [IQI], $24.44-$313.19; 34 estimates). The median incremental cost per additional person screened was $250.37 (IQI, $44.67-$609.38; 17 estimates). Studies that modeled final economic outcomes had a median incremental cost per person of $122.96 (IQI, $46.96-$124.80; 5 estimates), a median incremental screening rate of 15% (IQI, 14%-20%; 5 estimates), and a median incremental QALY per person of 0.04 years (IQI, 0.006-0.06 year; 5 estimates). The median incremental cost per QALY gained of $3120.00 (IQI, $782.59-$33 600.00; 5 estimates) was lower than $50 000, an established, conservative threshold of cost-effectiveness.Conclusions and relevanceInterventions focused on social determinants of health to improve breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening appear to be cost-effective for underserved, vulnerable populations in the United States. The increased screening rates were associated with earlier diagnosis and treatment and in improved health outcomes with significant gains in QALYs. These findings represent the latest economic evidence to guide implementation of these interventions, which serve the dual purpose of enhancing health equity and economic efficiency.

Project description:BackgroundImproving the delivery, uptake, and implementation of cancer screening to meet evidence-based recommendations is needed to reduce persistent cancer health disparities in the USA. Current national public health targets emphasize the role of social determinants of health (SDOH) on cancer screening. However, there remains a need to explicate these linkages, toward the goal of identifying and implementing effective interventions that target and address SDOH to reduce inequities in cancer screening.MethodsWe will conduct a systematic review of English language peer-reviewed original research articles published between 2010 and 2021 that describe observational (qualitative and quantitative) and intervention studies conducted in the USA. In alignment with Healthy People 2030, we will include studies of breast, cervical, colorectal, and/or lung cancer screening. Guided by multiple SDOH frameworks, we will broadly define SDOH by five domain areas: economic stability, education access and quality, healthcare access and quality, neighborhood and built environment, and social and community context. Following systematic literature searches in five databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) and piloting of screening procedures, reviewers will independently screen titles/abstracts for potential relevance. Reviewer pairs will then screen full text articles for eligibility criteria. We will extract data items from included articles, including study characteristics, cancer screening intervention information, and coding of SDOH constructs. We will assess study quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and synthesize our findings using narrative, descriptive statistics, tables, and figures. Our approach will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) recommendations.DiscussionBy completing this systematic review, we will summarize recent literature on SDOH and cancer screening, identify research gaps for inclusion of SDOH, and propose future opportunities for advancing equity in cancer screening by integrating SDOH as part of the implementation context to promote uptake, sustainability, and scale-up in the implementation of screening guidelines.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021276582 .

Project description:BackgroundIn oestrogen-receptor positive breast cancer, daily oral adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for at least 5 years significantly reduces risks of recurrence and breast cancer-specific mortality. However, many women are poorly adherent to ET. Development of effective adherence support requires comprehensive understanding of influences on adherence. We undertook an umbrella review to identify determinants of ET adherence.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane and PROSPERO (inception to 08/2022) to identify systematic reviews on factors influencing ET adherence. Abstracted determinants were mapped to the World Health Organization's dimensions of adherence. Reviews were quality appraised and overlap assessed.ResultsOf 5732 citations screened, 17 reviews were eligible (9 quantitative primary studies; 4 qualitative primary studies; 4 qualitative or quantitative studies) including 215 primary papers. All five WHO dimensions influenced ET non-adherence: The most consistently identified non-adherence determinants were patient-related factors (e.g. lower perceived ET necessity, more treatment concerns, perceptions of ET 'cons' vs. 'pros'). Healthcare system/healthcare professional-related factors (e.g. perceived lower quality health professional interaction/relationship) were also important and, to a somewhat lesser extent, socio-economic factors (e.g. lower levels of social/economic/material support). Evidence was more mixed for medication-related and condition-related factors, but several may be relevant (e.g. experiencing side-effects, cost). Potentially modifiable factors are more influential than non-modifiable/fixed factors (e.g. patient characteristics).ConclusionsThe evidence-base on ET adherence determinants is extensive. Future empirical studies should focus on less well-researched areas and settings. The determinants themselves are numerous and complex in indicating that adherence support should be multifaceted, addressing multiple determinants.

Dataset Information

Social determinants of breast cancer in the Caribbean: a systematic review.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Social determinants of breast cancer in the Caribbean: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets