Dataset Information

Systematic review of neighborhood socioeconomic indices studied across the cancer control continuum.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is extensive interest in understanding how neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) may affect cancer incidence or survival. However, variability regarding items included and approaches used to form a composite nSES index presents challenges in summarizing overall associations with cancer. Given recent calls for standardized measures of neighborhood sociodemographic effects in cancer disparity research, the objective of this systematic review was to identify and compare existing nSES indices studied across the cancer continuum (incidence, screening, diagnosis, treatment, survival/mortality) and summarize associations by race/ethnicity and cancer site to inform future cancer disparity studies.

Methods

Using PRISMA guidelines, peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2019 containing keywords related to nSES and cancer were identified in PubMed.

Results

Twenty-four nSES indices were identified from 75 studies. In general, findings indicated a significant association between nSES and cancer outcomes (n = 64/75 studies; 85.33%), with 42/64 (65.63%) adjusting for highly-correlated individual SES factors (e.g., education). However, the direction of association differed by cancer site, race/ethnicity, and nSES index.

Conclusions

This review highlights several methodologic and conceptual issues surrounding nSES measurement and potential associations with cancer disparities. Recommendations pertaining to the selection of nSES measures are provided, which may help inform disparity-related disease processes and improve the identification of vulnerable populations in need of intervention.

SUBMITTER: Sorice KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9119356 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of neighborhood socioeconomic indices studied across the cancer control continuum.

Sorice Kristen A KA Fang Carolyn Y CY Wiese Daniel D Ortiz Angel A Chen Yuku Y Henry Kevin A KA Lynch Shannon M SM

Cancer medicine 20220214 10

<h4>Background</h4>There is extensive interest in understanding how neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) may affect cancer incidence or survival. However, variability regarding items included and approaches used to form a composite nSES index presents challenges in summarizing overall associations with cancer. Given recent calls for standardized measures of neighborhood sociodemographic effects in cancer disparity research, the objective of this systematic review was to identify and compare ...[more]

PMID: 35166051

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEmerging literature notes the importance of neighborhood-level factors for cancer control behaviors beyond that of individual factors. Markers of neighborhood-level disadvantage have been linked to greater likelihood of nonsalutary cancer control behaviors. There has been less examination of many neighborhood factors simultaneously, which more accurately reflects individuals' daily experiences. We estimated associations of neighborhood deprivation indices with cancer control behaviors, identifying the relative importance of neighborhood-level deprivation index components for these outcomes.MethodsWe used data from the Religion and Health in African Americans study, a national probability sample of African American adults. We separately considered 4 screening and 4 prevention behaviors as outcomes. We constructed neighborhood deprivation indices using census tract-level data and estimated their associations with outcomes using bayesian index models, adjusting for individual-level covariates. We reported odds ratios (ORs), credible intervals, and exceedance probabilities.ResultsParticipants in our sample engaged in relatively high levels of screening behaviors and lower levels of prevention behaviors. Neighborhood deprivation indices were statistically significantly associated with a greater likelihood of binge drinking (OR = 1.13, exceedance probability = 98.5%), smoking (OR = 1.07, exceedance probability = 99.4%), and insufficient colonoscopy (exceedance probability = 99.9%), Papanicolaou (exceedance probability = 99.7%), and prostate-specific antigen (exceedance probability = 99.1%) screening. Within neighborhood deprivation indices, median household income, percentage of individuals without some college education, and percentage of individuals unemployed received large estimated importance weights.ConclusionWe identified statistically significant associations between neighborhood disadvantage and nonsalutary cancer control behaviors as well as important neighborhood-level deprivation index components for each outcome. These and similar findings from future studies should be used to target specific neighborhood factors for specific cancer control behaviors rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach.

Project description:BackgroundSocioeconomic disadvantage and other social stressors in childhood have been linked with cardiometabolic diseases in adulthood; however the mechanisms underlying these observed associations and the timing of their emergence are unclear. The aim of this review was to evaluate research that examined relationships between socioeconomic disadvantage and other social stressors in relation to less-studied cardiometabolic risk factors among youth, including carbohydrate metabolism-related factors, lipids, and central adiposity.MethodsWe searched PubMed and ISI Web of Science to identify relevant publications between 2001 and 2013.Studies were selected based on 4 criteria: (1) the study examined an association between at least one social or economic stressor and one relevant outcome prior to age 21; (2) the sample originated from a high-income country; (3) the sample was not selected based on a health condition; and (4) a central aim was to evaluate the effect of the social or economic stressor on at least one relevant outcome. Abstracts were screened and relevant publications were obtained and evaluated for inclusion criteria. We abstracted data from selected articles, summarized them by exposures and outcomes, and assigned an evidence grade.ResultsOur search identified 37 publications from 31 studies. Socioeconomic disadvantage was consistently associated with greater central adiposity. Research to date does not provide clear evidence of an association between childhood stressors and lipids or carbohydrate metabolism-related factors.ConclusionsThis review demonstrates a paucity of research on the relationship of socioeconomic disadvantage and other social stressors to lipid and carbohydrate metabolism-related factors in youth. Accordingly, it is not possible to form strong conclusions, particularly with regard to stressors other than socioeconomic disadvantage. Findings are used to inform priorities for future research. An improved understanding of these pathways is critical for identifying novel prevention targets and intervention opportunities to protect the long-term health of children and adolescents.

Project description:BackgroundIntervention-generated inequalities are unintended variations in outcome that result from the organisation and delivery of health interventions. Socioeconomic inequalities in treatment may occur for some common cancers. Although the incidence and outcome of lung cancer varies with socioeconomic position (SEP), it is not known whether socioeconomic inequalities in treatment occur and how these might affect mortality. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing research on socioeconomic inequalities in receipt of treatment for lung cancer.Methods and findingsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched up to September 2012 for cohort studies of participants with a primary diagnosis of lung cancer (ICD10 C33 or C34), where the outcome was receipt of treatment (rates or odds of receiving treatment) and where the outcome was reported by a measure of SEP. Forty-six papers met the inclusion criteria, and 23 of these papers were included in meta-analysis. Socioeconomic inequalities in receipt of lung cancer treatment were observed. Lower SEP was associated with a reduced likelihood of receiving any treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 0.79 [95% CI 0.73 to 0.86], p<0.001), surgery (OR = 0.68 [CI 0.63 to 0.75], p<0.001) and chemotherapy (OR = 0.82 [95% CI 0.72 to 0.93], p = 0.003), but not radiotherapy (OR = 0.99 [95% CI 0.86 to 1.14], p = 0.89), for lung cancer. The association remained when stage was taken into account for receipt of surgery, and was found in both universal and non-universal health care systems.ConclusionsPatients with lung cancer living in more socioeconomically deprived circumstances are less likely to receive any type of treatment, surgery, and chemotherapy. These inequalities cannot be accounted for by socioeconomic differences in stage at presentation or by differences in health care system. Further investigation is required to determine the patient, tumour, clinician, and system factors that may contribute to socioeconomic inequalities in receipt of lung cancer treatment.

Project description:Background: The impact of socioeconomic differences on cancer survival has been investigated for several cancer types showing lower cancer survival in patients from lower socioeconomic groups. However, little is known about the relation between the strength of association and the level of adjustment and level of aggregation of the socioeconomic status measure. Here, we conduct the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the association of individual and area-based measures of socioeconomic status with lung cancer survival. Methods: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, we searched for studies on socioeconomic differences in lung cancer survival in four electronic databases. A study was included if it reported a measure of survival in relation to education, income, occupation, or composite measures (indices). If possible, meta-analyses were conducted for studies reporting on individual and area-based socioeconomic measures. Results: We included 94 studies in the review, of which 23 measured socioeconomic status on an individual level and 71 on an area-based level. Seventeen studies were eligible to be included in the meta-analyses. The meta-analyses revealed a poorer prognosis for patients with low individual income (pooled hazard ratio: 1.13, 95 % confidence interval: 1.08-1.19, reference: high income), but not for individual education. Group comparisons for hazard ratios of area-based studies indicated a poorer prognosis for lower socioeconomic groups, irrespective of the socioeconomic measure. In most studies, reported 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates across socioeconomic status groups showed decreasing rates with decreasing socioeconomic status for both individual and area-based measures. We cannot confirm a consistent relationship between level of aggregation and effect size, however, comparability across studies was hampered by heterogeneous reporting of socioeconomic status and survival measures. Only eight studies considered smoking status in the analysis. Conclusions: Our findings suggest a weak positive association between individual income and lung cancer survival. Studies reporting on socioeconomic differences in lung cancer survival should consider including smoking status of the patients in their analysis and to stratify by relevant prognostic factors to further explore the reasons for socioeconomic differences. A common definition for socioeconomic status measures is desirable to further enhance comparisons between nations and across different levels of aggregation.

Project description:The developmental health of young children is highly influenced by the socioeconomic conditions in which they are raised. How to accurately measure these conditions is a point of debate in the current literature on child development, health, and social determinants. We have evaluated four existing indices of socioeconomic status (SES) to determine the most relevant for the analysis of early childhood development (ECD) in Canada. Following a literature review of published SES indices which used 2006 Canadian Census data, four indices were chosen based on their relevance to ECD and the number of citations in subsequent articles. These were: the Canadian Deprivation Index, the Socioeconomic Factor Index, the Canadian Marginalization Index and an index created by the Early Childhood Mapping Project in Alberta, Canada. The indices were replicated using SES data for 2038 customized geographic neighbourhoods encompassing 99.9% of the Canadian population, and the relationship of the indices to ECD was investigated by linking to aggregated data from the Early Development Instrument (EDI), a teacher-completed questionnaire used to assess kindergarten children's physical, social, emotional, and cognitive development, and communication skills. The derived SES indices were compared based on four criteria: the input variables used, the index structure, the interpretability of the index and the variance they explained (R2) in the different EDI outcome measures. In terms of variance explained, material components of the SES indices (e.g., income, education) consistently showed the strongest association with children's language and cognitive development. The patterns of association for the non-material SES components and the other developmental domains of the EDI were more complex. We discuss the findings in regard to current developments in the field, and the need for refining empirical and theoretical approaches to examine associations between different facets of SES contextual factors and different aspects of ECD outcomes.

Dataset Information

Systematic review of neighborhood socioeconomic indices studied across the cancer control continuum.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Systematic review of neighborhood socioeconomic indices studied across the cancer control continuum.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets