Mortality from cervical and colorectal cancers can be reduced through routine screening, which can often be accessed through primary care. However, uptake of screening in the US remains suboptimal, with disparities observed across geographic characteristics, such as metropolitan status or level of racial residential segregation. Little is known about the interaction of metropolitan status and segregation in their relationship with cancer screening. We conducted a quantitative survey of 474 women aged 45-65 in central Pennsylvania. The survey collected county-level characteristics and participant-level demographics, beliefs, cancer screening barriers, and cervical and colorectal cancer screening. We used bivariate and multivariable logistic regression to analyze relationships between metropolitan status and segregation with screening. For cervical cancer screening, 82.8% of participants were up-to-date, which did not differ by county type in the final analysis. Higher healthcare trust, higher cancer fatalism, and reporting cost as a barrier were associated with cervical cancer screening. For colorectal cancer screening, 55.4% of participants were up-to-date, which differed by county type. In metropolitan counties, segregation was not associated with colorectal cancer screening, but in non-metropolitan counties, segregation was associated with greater colorectal cancer screening. The relationship between metropolitan status and being up-to-date with colorectal, but not cervical, cancer screening varied by segregation. Other important beliefs and barriers to screening varied by county type. This research can guide future cancer screening interventions in primary care settings in underserved communities. Keywords Metropolitan status • Racial residential segregation • Cancer screening • Cervical cancer • Colorectal cancer • Health behaviorWhile significant progress has been made in decreasing the rates of cervical cancer and colorectal cancer overall, there continues to be significant, unequal burden based on geography, race, and socioeconomic status [1-3]. For example, residents of rural communities in the U.S. have higher cancer mortality rates than their urban counterparts [4][5][6]. This disparity may be related to lower rates of screening and delays in diagnosis of cancer in rural compared to urban communities [7,8]. Primary care often serves as the access * Jennifer L. Moss
Background Self-sampling for colorectal and cervical cancer screening can address the observed geographic disparities in cancer burden by alleviating barriers to screening participation, such as access to primary care. This preliminary study examines qualitative themes regarding cervical and colorectal cancer self-sampling screening tools among federally qualified health center clinical and administrative staff in underserved communities. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted with clinical or administrative employees (≥18 years of age) from FQHCs in rural and racially segregated counties in Pennsylvania. Data were managed and analyzed using QSR NVivo 12. Content analysis was used to identify themes about attitudes towards self-sampling for cancer screening. Results Eight interviews were conducted. Average participant age was 42 years old and 88% of participants were female. Participants indicated that a shared advantage for both colorectal and cervical cancer self-sampling tests was their potential to increase screening rates by simplifying the screening process and offering an alternative to those who decline traditional screening. A shared disadvantage to self-sampling was the potential for inaccurate sample collection, either through the test itself or the sample collection by the patient. Conclusions Self-sampling offers a promising solution to increase cervical and colorectal cancer screening in rural and racially segregated communities. This study’s findings can guide future research and interventions which integrate self-sampling screening into routine primary care practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.