The census tract-based SES index provides a valuable tool for monitoring the disparities in cancer burdens while avoiding potential identity disclosure. This index, divided into tertiles and quintiles, is now available to the researchers on request.
In health disparities research, both relative and absolute measures provide context. A better understanding of the interactions between race/ethnicity and SES may be useful in directing screening and treatment resources toward at-risk populations.
Unrealistically optimistic or pessimistic risk perceptions may be associated with maladaptive health behaviors. This study characterized factors associated with unrealistic optimism (UO) and unrealistic pessimism (UP) about breast cancer. Data from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey were analyzed (N=14,426 women). After accounting for objective risk status, many (43.8%) women displayed UO, 12.3% displayed UP, 34.5% had accurate risk perceptions (their perceived risk matched their calculated risk), and 9.5% indicated “don’t know/no response.” Multivariate multinomial logistic regression indicated that UO was associated with higher education and never smoking. UP was associated with lower education, lower income, being non-Hispanic Black, having ≥3 comorbidities, current smoking, and being overweight. UO was more likely to emerge in younger and older than in middle-aged individuals. UO and UP are associated with different demographic, health, and behavioral characteristics. Population segments that are already vulnerable to negative health outcomes displayed more UP than less vulnerable populations.
The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program provides a rich source of data stratified according to tumor biomarkers that play an important role in cancer surveillance research. These data are useful for analyzing trends in cancer incidence and survival. These tumor markers, however, are often prone to missing observations. To address the problem of missing data, the authors employed sequential regression multivariate imputation for breast cancer variables, with a particular focus on estrogen receptor status, using data from 13 SEER registries covering the period 1992-2007. In this paper, they present an approach to accounting for missing information through the creation of imputed data sets that can be analyzed using existing software (e.g., SEER*Stat) developed for analyzing cancer registry data. Bias in age-adjusted trends in female breast cancer incidence is shown graphically before and after imputation of estrogen receptor status, stratified by age and race. The imputed data set will be made available in SEER*Stat (http://seer.cancer.gov/analysis/index.html) to facilitate accurate estimation of breast cancer incidence trends. To ensure that the imputed data set is used correctly, the authors provide detailed, step-by-step instructions for conducting analyses. This is the first time that a nationally representative, population-based cancer registry data set has been imputed and made available to researchers for conducting a variety of analyses of breast cancer incidence trends.
BackgroundMore than half of all smartphone app downloads involve weight, diet, and exercise. If successful, these lifestyle apps may have far-reaching effects for disease prevention and health cost-savings, but few researchers have analyzed data from these apps.ObjectiveThe purposes of this study were to analyze data from a commercial health app (Lose It!) in order to identify successful weight loss subgroups via exploratory analyses and to verify the stability of the results.MethodsCross-sectional, de-identified data from Lose It! were analyzed. This dataset (n=12,427,196) was randomly split into 24 subsamples, and this study used 3 subsamples (combined n=972,687). Classification and regression tree methods were used to explore groupings of weight loss with one subsample, with descriptive analyses to examine other group characteristics. Data mining validation methods were conducted with 2 additional subsamples.ResultsIn subsample 1, 14.96% of users lost 5% or more of their starting body weight. Classification and regression tree analysis identified 3 distinct subgroups: “the occasional users” had the lowest proportion (4.87%) of individuals who successfully lost weight; “the basic users” had 37.61% weight loss success; and “the power users” achieved the highest percentage of weight loss success at 72.70%. Behavioral factors delineated the subgroups, though app-related behavioral characteristics further distinguished them. Results were replicated in further analyses with separate subsamples.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that distinct subgroups can be identified in “messy” commercial app data and the identified subgroups can be replicated in independent samples. Behavioral factors and use of custom app features characterized the subgroups. Targeting and tailoring information to particular subgroups could enhance weight loss success. Future studies should replicate data mining analyses to increase methodology rigor.
PURPOSEThe rapid proliferation of mobile devices offers unprecedented opportunities for patients and health care professionals to exchange health information electronically, but little is known about patients' willingness to exchange various types of health information using these devices. We examined willingness to exchange different types of health information via mobile devices, and assessed whether sociodemographic characteristics and trust in clinicians were associated with willingness in a nationally representative sample. METHODSWe analyzed data for 3,165 patients captured in the 2013 Health Information National Trends Survey. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to test differences in willingness. Ordinal logistic regression analysis assessed correlates of willingness to exchange 9 types of information separately. RESULTSParticipants were very willing to exchange appointment reminders (odds ratio [OR] = 6.66; 95% CI, 5.68-7.81), general health tips (OR = 2.03; 95% CI, 1.74-2.38), medication reminders (OR = 2.73; 95% CI, 2.35-3.19), laboratory/test results (OR = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.62-1.92), vital signs (OR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.48-1.80), lifestyle behaviors (OR = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24-1.58), and symptoms (OR = 1.62; 95% CI, 1.46-1.79) as compared with diagnostic information. Older adults had lower odds of being more willing to exchange any type of information. Education, income, and trust in health care professional information correlated with willingness to exchange certain types of information.CONCLUSIONS Respondents were less willing to exchange via mobile devices information that may be considered sensitive or complex. Age, socioeconomic factors, and trust in professional information were associated with willingness to engage in mobile health information exchange. Both information type and demographic group should be considered when developing and tailoring mobile technologies for patient-clinician communication. Ann Fam Med 2016;14:34-40. doi: 10.1370/afm.1888. INTRODUCTIONT he ownership of mobile devices and the use of these devices for health purposes have been increasing rapidly.1-4 These increases transcend nearly all sociodemographic categories, 2,4 providing new opportunities to deliver health information to hard-to-reach or underserved populations. Health information exchange (HIE) between health care professionals and patients, in particular, has been increasing, allowing both parties to access and communicate health information electronically. Others have noted that mobile technologies may be a solution to the growing demand for exchanging one's information electronically, and may be a promising strategy for cancer prevention and control. [5][6][7] The studies that have examined HIE, however, have been primarily Internet based, with little focus on mobile devices. These Internet-based studies have found that sociodemographic characteristics and the type of information that is being shared influence attitudes toward HIE. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] An initial qualitati...
Background: There is no model to estimate absolute invasive breast cancer risk for Hispanic women. Methods: The San Francisco Bay Area Breast Cancer Study (SFBCS) provided data on Hispanic breast cancer case patients (533 US-born, 553 foreign-born) and control participants (464 US-born, 947 foreign-born). These data yielded estimates of relative risk (RR) and attributable risk (AR) separately for US-born and foreign-born women. Nativity-specific absolute risks were estimated by combining RR and AR information with nativity-specific invasive breast cancer incidence and competing mortality rates from the California Cancer Registry and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program to develop the Hispanic risk model (HRM). In independent data, we assessed model calibration through observed/expected (O/E) ratios, and we estimated discriminatory accuracy with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) statistic. Results: The US-born HRM included age at first full-term pregnancy, biopsy for benign breast disease, and family history of breast cancer; the foreign-born HRM also included age at menarche. The HRM estimated lower risks than the National Cancer Institute's Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) for US-born Hispanic women, but higher risks in foreign-born women. In independent data from the Women's Health Initiative, the HRM was well calibrated for US-born women (observed/expected [O/E] ratio ¼ 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] ¼ 0.81 to 1.40), but seemed to overestimate risk in foreign-born women (O/E ratio ¼ 0.66, 95% CI ¼ 0.41 to 1.07). The AUC was 0.564 (95% CI ¼ 0.485 to 0.644) for US-born and 0.625 (95% CI ¼ 0.487 to 0.764) for foreign-born women. Conclusions: The HRM is the first absolute risk model that is based entirely on data specific to Hispanic women by nativity. Further studies in Hispanic women are warranted to evaluate its validity.
Background Area-level measures are often used to approximate socioeconomic status (SES) when individual-level data are not available. However, no national studies have examined the validity of these measures in approximating individual-level SES. Methods Data came from ~ 3,471,000 participants in the Mortality Disparities in American Communities study, which links data from 2008 American Community Survey to National Death Index (through 2015). We calculated correlations, specificity, sensitivity, and odds ratios to summarize the concordance between individual-, census tract-, and county-level SES indicators (e.g., household income, college degree, unemployment). We estimated the association between each SES measure and mortality to illustrate the implications of misclassification for estimates of the SES-mortality association. Results Participants with high individual-level SES were more likely than other participants to live in high-SES areas. For example, individuals with high household incomes were more likely to live in census tracts (r = 0.232; odds ratio [OR] = 2.284) or counties (r = 0.157; OR = 1.325) whose median household income was above the US median. Across indicators, mortality was higher among low-SES groups (all p < .0001). Compared to county-level, census tract-level measures more closely approximated individual-level associations with mortality. Conclusions Moderate agreement emerged among binary indicators of SES across individual, census tract, and county levels, with increased precision for census tract compared to county measures when approximating individual-level values. When area level measures were used as proxies for individual SES, the SES-mortality associations were systematically underestimated. Studies using area-level SES proxies should use caution when selecting, analyzing, and interpreting associations with health outcomes.
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.