Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37753379›Full record

ReviewPreventive medicine reports2023

How is equity captured for colorectal, breast and cervical cancer incidence and screening in the Republic of Ireland: A review.

Sophie Mulcahy Symmons, Paul Leavy, Laura Heavey, Caroline Mason Mohan, Amanda Drury, Aoife De Brún

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Preventive medicine reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Sophie Mulcahy SymmonsSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Ireland.
Paul LeavyCentre for Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, Trinty College Dublin, Ireland.
Laura HeaveyDepartment of Public Health Medicine, National Screening Service, King's Inn House, 200 Parnell Street, Dublin 1, Ireland.
Caroline Mason MohanDepartment of Public Health Medicine, National Screening Service, King's Inn House, 200 Parnell Street, Dublin 1, Ireland.
Amanda DrurySchool of Nursing, Psychotherapy and Community Health, Dublin City University, Glasnevin, Dublin 9, Ireland.
Aoife De BrúnSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Organised screening reduces the incidence and late-stage diagnosis of cancer. However, participation in screening is not consistent across populations. Variations can be measured using demographic factors on place of residence, race/ethnicity, occupation, gender/sex, religion, education, socio-economic position (SEP), and social capital (PROGRESS-Plus stratifiers). The Republic of Ireland has screening programmes for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer but assessment of screening participation and cancer incidence is inconsistent. The review aimed to evaluate the use of stratifiers in breast, cervical and colorectal cancer incidence and screening literature, and assess variations in incidence and screening participation across subgroups in Ireland. Methods: PubMed was searched systematically and grey literature was identified via Google, Google Scholar, Lenus (Irish Health Research repository), and The Irish Longitudinal Study of Aging (TILDA) in June 2022. Studies were included if they captured stratifiers alongside incidence or screening participation data of the three cancers. Results: Thirty-six studies and reports were included. Place of residence, SEP, sex, and age were most frequently captured. Incidence and screening participation varied by age, place of residence, SEP, and sex. Discussion: PROGRESS-Plus is a useful equity lens to review health literature. Cancer incidence and screening participation studies lacked a comprehensive equity lens resulting in difficulties in identifying inequities and non-attenders. Place of residence, SEP and ethnicity should be prioritised in monitoring inequities. Integrating unique health identifiers should improve monitoring and enable evidence-based population-specific interventions to promote screening. Collaboration with community organisations would support engagement with vulnerable populations when data is limited.

Indexed as

Breast cancerCancer screeningCervical cancerColorectal cancerEarly detection of cancerHealth inequalitiesHealth inequitiesIncidenceIrelandPROGRESS-Plus

Identifiers

PMID37753379
PMCPMC10518567

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.