Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28241787›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2017

Using self-reported data on the social determinants of health in primary care to identify cancer screening disparities: opportunities and challenges.

A K Lofters, A Schuler, M Slater, N N Baxter, N Persaud, A D Pinto, E Kucharski, S Davie, R Nisenbaum, T Kiran

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Socioeconomic determinants of overweight and obesity among Mexican children and adolescents: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Development of the 10-question household foodwork interactional assessment questionnaire (FIA-Q10).The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

A K LoftersDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada. aisha.lofters@utoronto.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7322-0894
A SchulerDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
M SlaterDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
N N BaxterDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Health Sciences Building, 155 College Street, 6th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M7, Canada.
N PersaudDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
A D PintoDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
E KucharskiCancer Care Ontario, 620 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 2L7, Canada.
S DavieDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
R NisenbaumCentre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
T KiranDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundData on the social determinants of health can help primary care practices target improvement efforts, yet relevant data are rarely available. Our family practice located in Toronto, Ontario routinely collects patient-level sociodemographic data via a pilot-tested survey developed by a multi-organizational steering committee. We sought to use these data to assess the relationship between the social determinants and colorectal, cervical and breast cancer screening, and to describe the opportunities and challenges of using data on social determinants from a self-administered patient survey.

methodsPatients of the family practice eligible for at least one of the three cancer screening types, based on age and screening guidelines as of June 30, 2015 and who had answered at least one question on a socio-demographic survey were included in the study. We linked self-reported data from the sociodemographic survey conducted in the waiting room with patients' electronic medical record data and cancer screening records. We created an individual-level income variable (low-income cut-off) that defined a poverty threshold and took household size into account. The sociodemographic characteristics of patients who were overdue for screening were compared to those who were up-to-date for screening for each cancer type using chi-squared tests.

resultsWe analysed data for 5766 patients for whom we had survey data. Survey participants had significantly higher screening rates (72.9, 78.7, 74.4% for colorectal, cervical and breast cancer screening respectively) than the 13, 036 patients for whom we did not have survey data (59.2, 65.3, 58.9% respectively). Foreign-born patients were significantly more likely to be up-to-date on colorectal screening than their Canadian-born peers but showed no significant differences in breast or cervical cancer screening. We found a significant association between the low-income cut-off variable and cancer screening; neighbourhood income quintile was not significantly associated with cancer screening. Housing status was also significantly associated with colorectal, cervical and breast cancer screening. There was a large amount of missing data for the low-income cut-off variable, approximately 25% across the three cohorts.

conclusionWhile we were able to show that neighbourhood income might under-estimate income-related disparities in screening, individual-level income was also the most challenging variable to collect. Future work in this area should target the income disparity in cancer screening and simultaneously explore how best to collect measures of poverty.

Indexed as

Self ReportAdultAgedEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedMorbidityNeoplasmsOntarioPrimary Health CareSocial Determinants of HealthSocioeconomic FactorsYoung AdultBreast cancerCervical cancerColorectal cancerScreeningSocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID28241787
PMCPMC5330155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.