Dataset Information

Breast cancer screening adherence rates and barriers of implementation in ethnic, cultural and religious minorities: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting women worldwide. Adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines is frequently lower in racial, ethnic and cultural minority populations and is affected by potential inequities or barriers to screening that these minorities face. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to collect information from different minority groups worldwide, assess adherence to breast cancer screening and evaluate barriers or limitations causing non-adherence, which should facilitate the development of effective interventions. A search was conducted through PubMed and Web of Science. Studies were considered as eligible if they met the following criteria: i) Female patients; ii) breast cancer screening program implemented in the country; iii) minority groups; iv) asymptomatic; v) report written in Portuguese or English; vi) study published from 2015 onwards. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist was used for qualitative studies and the Strengthening The Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist for cross-sectional studies. From the 348 initial articles, 86 were removed due to duplication and 19 were selected, analyzed and summarized, accordingly. Of the 19 studies included, 5.3% were classified as high quality, 52.6% as moderate to high and 42.1% as moderate. A total of 15 studies were cross-sectional and 4 were qualitative, collectively including 250,733 women. The rate of adherence to mammogram in different minorities was evaluated, obtaining a mean value of 49.7% in the last 2 years, and statistically significant barriers were selected and divided into sociodemographic; personal; ethnic, cultural and religious; and external factors. The characteristics of each population play a major role in the population's breast health practices. If the population, adherence rates, barriers and inequities are carefully studied, screening models may be customized and participation to breast cancer screening can be optimized, thereby reducing the high breast cancer-associated mortality.

SUBMITTER: Ferreira CS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8145341 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are widespread concerns that ethnic minorities and migrants may have inadequate access to COVID-19 vaccines. . Improving vaccine uptake among these vulnerable groups is important towards controlling the spread of COVID-19 and reducing unnecessary mortality. Here we perform a systematic review of ethnic minorities' and migrants' access to and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsWe searched PubMed and Web of Science databases for papers published between 1 January 2020 and 7 October 2021. Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed articles; written in English, included data or estimates of ethnic minorities' or migrants' access to vaccines; and employed either qualitative or quantitative methods. Of a total of 248 studies screened, 33 met these criteria and included in the final sample. Risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Critical Appraisal Skills Program tools. We conducted a Synthesis Without Meta-analysis for quantitative studies and a Framework synthesis for qualitative studies.Results31 of the included studies were conducted in high-income countries, including in the US (n = 17 studies), UK (n = 10), Qatar (n = 2), Israel (n = 1) and France (n = 1). One study was in an upper middle-income country -China (n = 1) and another covered multiple countries (n = 1). 26 studies reported outcomes for ethnic minorities while 9 studies reported on migrants. Most of the studies were quantitative -cross sectional studies (n = 24) and ecological (n = 4). The remaining were qualitative (n = 4) and mixed methods (n = 1). There was consistent evidence of elevated levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Black/Afro-Caribbean groups in the US and UK, while studies of Hispanic/Latino populations in the US and Asian populations in the UK provided mixed pictures, with levels higher, lower, or the same as their White counterparts. Asians in the US had the highest COVID-19 vaccine acceptance compared to other ethnic groups. There was higher vaccine acceptance among migrant groups in Qatar and China than in the general population. However, migrants to the UK experienced barriers to vaccine access, mainly attributed to language and communication issues. Lack of confidence, mainly due to mistrust of government and health systems coupled with poor communication were the main barriers to uptake among Black ethnic minorities and migrants.ConclusionsOur study found that low confidence in COVID-19 vaccines among Black ethnic minorities driven by mistrust and safety concerns led to high vaccine hesitancy in this group. Such vaccine hesitancy rates constitute a major barrier to COVID-19 vaccine uptake among this ethnic minority. For migrants, convenience factors such as language barriers, fear of deportation and reduced physical access reduced access to COVID-19 vaccines. Building trust, reducing physical barriers and improving communication and transparency about vaccine development through healthcare workers, religious and community leaders can improve access and facilitate uptake of COVID-19 vaccines among ethnic minority and migrant communities.

Project description:BACKGROUND:First-line conservative treatment for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women is behavioral intervention, including pelvic-floor muscle (PFM) exercise and bladder control strategies. OBJECTIVE:The purposes of this study were: (1) to describe adherence and barriers to exercise and bladder control strategy adherence and (2) to identify predictors of exercise adherence. DESIGN:This study was a planned secondary analysis of data from a multisite, randomized trial comparing intravaginal continence pessary, multicomponent behavioral therapy, and combined therapy in women with stress-predominant urinary incontinence (UI). METHODS:Data were analyzed from the groups who received behavioral intervention alone (n=146) or combined with continence pessary therapy (n=150). Adherence was measured during supervised treatment and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-randomization. Barriers to adherence were surveyed during treatment and at the 3-month time point. Regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of exercise adherence during supervised treatment and at the 3- and 12-month time points. RESULTS:During supervised treatment, ?86% of the women exercised ?5 days a week, and ?80% performed at least 30 contractions on days they exercised. At 3, 6, and 12 months post-randomization, 95%, 88%, and 80% of women, respectively, indicated they were still performing PFM exercises. During supervised treatment and at 3 months post-randomization, ?87% of the women reported using learned bladder control strategies to prevent SUI. In addition, the majority endorsed at least one barrier to PFM exercise, most commonly "trouble remembering to do exercises." Predictors of exercise adherence changed over time. During supervised intervention, less frequent baseline UI and higher baseline 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) mental scores predicted exercise adherence. At 3 months post-randomization, women who dropped out of the study had weaker PFMs at baseline. At 12 months post-randomization, only "trouble remembering" was associated with exercise adherence. LIMITATIONS:Adherence and barrier questionnaires were not validated. CONCLUSIONS:Adherence to PFM exercises and bladder control strategies for SUI can be high and sustained over time. However, behavioral interventions to help women link exercise to environmental and behavioral cues may only be beneficial over the short term.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The importance of cultural adaptations in behavioral interventions targeting ethnic minorities in high-income societies is widely recognized. Little is known, however, about the effectiveness of specific cultural adaptations in such interventions. AIM:To systematically review the effectiveness of specific cultural adaptations in interventions that target smoking cessation, diet, and/or physical activity and to explore features of such adaptations that may account for their effectiveness. METHODS:Systematic review using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials registers (1997-2009). INCLUSION CRITERIA:a) effectiveness study of a lifestyle intervention targeted to ethnic minority populations living in a high income society; b) interventions included cultural adaptations and a control group that was exposed to the intervention without the cultural adaptation under study; c) primary outcome measures included smoking cessation, diet, or physical activity. RESULTS:Out of 44904 hits, we identified 17 studies, all conducted in the United States. In five studies, specific cultural adaptations had a statistically significant effect on primary outcomes. The remaining studies showed no significant effects on primary outcomes, but some presented trends favorable for cultural adaptations. We observed that interventions incorporating a package of cultural adaptations, cultural adaptations that implied higher intensity and those incorporating family values were more likely to report statistically significant effects. Adaptations in smoking cessation interventions seem to be more effective than adaptations in interventions aimed at diet and physical activity. CONCLUSION:This review indicates that culturally targeted behavioral interventions may be more effective if cultural adaptations are implemented as a package of adaptations, the adaptation includes family level, and where the adaptation results in a higher intensity of the intervention. More systematic experiments are needed in which the aim is to gain insight in the best mix of cultural adaptations among diverse populations in various settings, particularly outside the US.

Project description:ImportanceDiabetic retinopathy is a major complication of diabetes for which regular screening improves visual health outcomes, yet adherence to screening is suboptimal.ObjectiveTo assess disparities in diabetic eye examination completion rates and evaluate barriers in those not previously screened.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study at a single academic center (Johns Hopkins Hospital pediatric diabetes center in Baltimore, Maryland) from December 2018 to November 2019, youths with type 1 or type 2 diabetes who met criteria for diabetic retinopathy screening and were enrolled in a prospective observational trial implementing point-of-care diabetic retinopathy screening were asked about prior diabetic retinopathy screening.Main outcomes and measuresDemographic and clinical characteristics were compared between those who did and did not have a previous diabetic eye examination and stratified according to race/ethnicity, using t tests and χ2 tests. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the association between race/ethnicity, screening, and other social determinants of health. A questionnaire assessing barriers to screening adherence was administered.ResultsOf 149 participants (76 male patients [51.0%]; mean [SD] age, 14.5 [2.3] years), 51 (34.2%) had not had a prior diabetic eye examination. These individuals were more likely than those who had prior diabetic eye examinations to be non-White youths (38 [75%] vs 31 [32%]; P < .001) and have type 2 diabetes (38 [75%] vs 10 [10%]; P < .001), Medicaid or public insurance (43 [84%] vs 31 [32%]; P < .001), lower household income (annual income ≤$25 000, 21 [41%] vs 9 [9%]; P < .001), and parents with education levels of high school or less (29 [67%] vs 22 [35%]; P < .001). The main barriers reported included not recalling being recommended to obtain a diabetic eye examination (19 [56%]), difficulty finding time for an additional appointment (10 [29%]), and transportation issues (7 [20%]). Minority youths were less likely to have a previous diabetic eye examination (non-White, 34 [46%] vs White, 64 [85%]; P < .001) and more likely to have diabetic retinopathy (11 [15%] v 2 [3%]; P = .008). Minority youths were less likely to get diabetic eye examinations even after adjusting for insurance, household income, and parental education level (odds ratio, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.10-0.79]; P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, non-White youths were less likely to undergo diabetic eye examinations yet more likely to have diabetic retinopathy compared with White youths. Addressing barriers to diabetic retinopathy screening may improve access to diabetic eye examination and facilitate early detection.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Appropriate screening may reduce the mortality and morbidity of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancers. However, effective implementation strategies are warranted if the full benefits of screening are to be realized. As part of a larger agenda to create an implementation guideline, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate interventions designed to increase the rate of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The interventions considered were: client reminders, client incentives, mass media, small media, group education, one-on-one education, reduction in structural barriers, reduction in out-of-pocket costs, provider assessment and feedback interventions, and provider incentives. Our primary outcome, screening completion, was calculated as the overall median post-intervention absolute percentage point (PP) change in completed screening tests. METHODS: Our first step was to conduct an iterative scoping review in the research area. This yielded three relevant high-quality systematic reviews. Serving as our evidentiary foundation, we conducted a formal update. Randomized controlled trials and cluster randomized controlled trials, published between 2004 and 2010, were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PSYCHinfo. RESULTS: The update yielded 66 studies new eligible studies with 74 comparisons. The new studies ranged considerably in quality. Client reminders, small media, and provider audit and feedback appear to be effective interventions to increase the uptake of screening for three cancers. One-on-one education and reduction of structural barriers also appears effective, but their roles with CRC and cervical screening, respectively, are less established. More study is required to assess client incentives, mass media, group education, reduction of out-of-pocket costs, and provider incentive interventions. CONCLUSION: The new evidence generally aligns with the evidence and conclusions from the original systematic reviews. This review served as the evidentiary foundation for an implementation guideline. Poor reporting, lack of precision and consistency in defining operational elements, and insufficient consideration of context and differences among populations are areas for additional research.

Dataset Information

Breast cancer screening adherence rates and barriers of implementation in ethnic, cultural and religious minorities: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets