Dataset Information

Associations of Household Income with Health-Related Quality of Life Following a Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis Varies With Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Existing evidence indicates household income as a predictor of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following a colorectal cancer diagnosis. This association likely varies with neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), but evidence is limited.

Methods

We included data from 1,355 colorectal cancer survivors participating in the population-based Puget Sound Colorectal Cancer Cohort (PSCCC). Survivors reported current annual household income; we measured HRQoL via the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Colorectal (FACT-C) tool. Using neighborhood data summarized within a 1-km radial buffer of Census block group centroids, we constructed a multidimensional nSES index measure. We employed survivors' geocoded residential addresses to append nSES score for Census block group of residence. With linear generalized estimating equations clustered on survivor location, we evaluated associations of household income with differences in FACT-C mean score, overall and stratified by nSES. We used separate models to explore relationships for wellbeing subscales.

Results

We found lower household income to be associated with clinically meaningful differences in overall FACT-C scores [<$30K: -13.6; 95% confidence interval (CI): -16.8 to -10.4] and subscale wellbeing after a recent colorectal cancer diagnosis. Relationships were slightly greater in magnitude for survivors living in lower SES neighborhoods.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that recently diagnosed lower income colorectal cancer survivors are likely to report lower HRQoL, and modestly more so in lower SES neighborhoods.

Impact

The findings from this work will aid future investigators' ability to further consider the contexts in which the income of survivors can be leveraged as a means of improving HRQoL.

SUBMITTER: Robinson JRM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8254776 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this paper is to systematically review the literature on the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and influenza immunization and to examine how certain measures of SES may influence interpretations of this relationship.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of existing peer-reviewed literature to evaluate the above relationship in the general population. Electronic databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) were searched from January 2012 to May 2017 to identify English-language studies relevant to this review. Studies were included where influenza vaccination was explicitly reported as the dependent variable and SES as the independent variable. We limited our review to measures of SES that focus on education, income, social class, occupation, and deprivation. Studies that measured SES using other variables (e.g., race, ethnicity, geographic location, rural or urban status, or insurance status) were excluded. Studies were also excluded if they did not report on the human population or did not analyze original data. The population of interest included all age groups, levels of health status, and sociodemographic backgrounds. The review was also limited to World Bank high-income countries. Two authors independently screened full-text articles after obtaining a Kappa score of K?= 0.867. The methodological quality of manuscripts was assessed using the appraisal tools developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Results were qualitatively reported and synthesized.ResultsOf the 42 articles included in this review, 52.4% (n?=?22) found that higher levels of SES resulted in higher levels of influenza vaccination; 4.5% (n?=?2) reported a negative association; and 14.3% (n?=?6) found no association. Just over a quarter (26.2%, n?=?12) of articles reported mixed results.ConclusionsThere was consistently a relationship between SES and influenza immunization, which varied according to how SES was measured. It is recommended that authors be explicit in defining the SES concept they are trying to capture and that they utilize multiple measures of SES (e.g., education, income, class).

Project description:BackgroundInequality in health outcomes in relation to Americans' socioeconomic position is rising.ObjectiveFirst, to evaluate the spatial relationship between neighborhood disadvantage and major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)-related events; second, to evaluate the relative extent to which neighborhood disadvantage and physiologic risk account for neighborhood-level variation in ASCVD event rates.DesignObservational cohort analysis of geocoded longitudinal electronic health records.SettingA single academic health center and surrounding neighborhoods in northeastern Ohio.Patients109 793 patients from the Cleveland Clinic Health System (CCHS) who had an outpatient lipid panel drawn between 2007 and 2010. The date of the first qualifying lipid panel served as the study baseline.MeasurementsTime from baseline to the first occurrence of a major ASCVD event (myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death) within 5 years, modeled as a function of a locally derived neighborhood disadvantage index (NDI) and the predicted 5-year ASCVD event rate from the Pooled Cohort Equations Risk Model (PCERM) of the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association. Outcome data were censored if no CCHS encounters occurred for 2 consecutive years or when state death data were no longer available (that is, from 2014 onward).ResultsThe PCERM systematically underpredicted ASCVD event risk among patients from disadvantaged communities. Model discrimination was poorer among these patients (concordance index [C], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.74]) than those from the most affluent communities (C, 0.80 [CI, 0.78 to 0.81]). The NDI alone accounted for 32.0% of census tract-level variation in ASCVD event rates, compared with 10.0% accounted for by the PCERM.LimitationsPatients from affluent communities were overrepresented. Outcomes of patients who received treatment for cardiovascular disease at Cleveland Clinic were assumed to be independent of whether the patients came from a disadvantaged or an affluent neighborhood.ConclusionNeighborhood disadvantage may be a powerful regulator of ASCVD event risk. In addition to supplemental risk models and clinical screening criteria, population-based solutions are needed to ameliorate the deleterious effects of neighborhood disadvantage on health outcomes.Primary funding sourceThe Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative of Cleveland and National Institutes of Health.