Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Journal for Equity in Health
Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

Inequalities in socioeconomic status and race and the odds of undergoing a mammogram in Brazil

Authors: Enirtes Caetano Prates Melo, Evangelina Xavier Gouveia de Oliveira, Dóra Chor, Marilia Sá Carvalho, Rejane Sobrino Pinheiro

Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Access to mammograms, in common with other diagnostic procedures, is strongly conditioned by socioeconomic disparities. Which aspects of inequality affect the odds of undergoing a mammogram, and whether they are the same in different localities, are relevant issues related to the success of health policies.

Methods

This study analyzed data from the 2008 PNAD - Brazilian National Household Sample Survey (11.607 million women 40 years of age or older), on having had at least one mammogram over life for women 40 years of age or older in each of Brazil’s nine Metropolitan Regions (MR), according to socioeconomic position. The effects of income, schooling, health insurance and race in the different regions were investigated using multivariate logistical regression for each region individually, and for all MRs combined. The age-adjusted odds of a woman having had a mammogram according to race and stratified by two income strata (and two schooling strata) were also analyzed.

Results

Having a higher income increases four to seven times a woman’s odds of having had at least one mammogram in all MRs except Curitiba. For schooling, the gradient, though less steep, is favorable to women with more years of study. Having health insurance increases two to three times the odds in all MRs. Multivariate analysis did not show differences due to race (except for the Fortaleza MR), but the stratified analysis by income and schooling shows effects of race in most MRs, with greater differences for women with higher socioeconomic status.

Conclusions

This study confirms that income and schooling, as well as having health insurance, are still important determinants of inequality in health service use in Brazil. Additionally, race also contributes to the odds of having had a mammogram. The point is not to isolate the effect of each factor, but to evaluate how their interrelations may exacerbate differences, generating patterns of cumulative adversity, a theme that is still little explored in Brazil. This is much more important when we consider that race has only recently started be included in analyses of health outcomes in Brazil.
Literature
1.
Wheeler SB, Reeder-Hayes KE, Carey LA. Disparities in breast cancer treatment and outcomes: biological, social, and health system determinants and opportunities for research. Oncologist. 2013;18(9):986–93.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Jones AR, Caplan LS, Davis MK. Racial/ethnic differences in the self-reported use of screening mammography. J Community Health. 2003;28(5):303–16.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Hahn KME, Bondy ML, Selvan M, Lund M, Liff JM, Flagg EW, Brinton LA, Porter P, Eley JW, Coates RJ. Factors associated with advanced disease stage at diagnosis in a population-based study of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166(9):1035–44.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Elting LS, Cooksley CD, Bekele BN, Giordano SH, Shih YC, Lovell KK, Avritscher EB, Theriault R. Mammography capacity impact on screening rates and breast cancer stage at diagnosis. Am J Prev Med. 2009;37(2):102–8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Paim J, Travassos C, Almeida C, Bahia L, Macinko J. The Brazilian health system: history, advances, and challenges. Lancet. 2011;377(9779):1778–97.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Oliveira EXG, Pinheiro RS, Melo ECP, Carvalho MS. Socioeconomic and geographic constraints to access mammography in Brasil, 2003-2008. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2011;16(9):3671–85.CrossRef
8.
Travassos C, Williams DR. The concept and measurement of race and their relationship to public health: a review focused on Brazil and the United States. Cad Saúde Pública. 2004;20(3):660–78.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Kaplan GA. What’s wrong with social epidemiology, and how can we make it better? Epidemiol Rev. 2004;26(1):124–35.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Galea S, Riddle M, Kaplan GA. Causal thinking and complex system approaches in epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;39(1):97–106.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Schootman M, Jeffe DB, Reschke AH, Aft RL. Disparities related to socioeconomic status and access to medical care remain in the United States among women who never had a mammogram. Cancer Causes Control. 2003;14:419–2.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios: síntese de indicadores. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE; 2009.
13.
14.
Brasil. Instituto Nacional de Câncer Jose de Alencar Gomes da Silva. Avaliação de indicadores das ações de detecção precoce dos cânceres do colo do útero e de mama - Brasil e Regiões, 2013. Rio de Janeiro, RJ; 2015.
15.
Andersen RM. Revisiting the behavioral model and access to medical care: does it matter? J Health Soc Behav. 1995;36:1–10.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Penchansky R, Thomas JW. The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Med Care. 1981;19(2):127–40.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Frenk J. The concept and measurement of accessibility. In: White KL, Frenk J, Ordonez C, Paganini JM, Starfield B, editors. Health Services Research: An Anthology. Washington: Pan American Health Organization; 1992. p. 858–64.
18.
Blas E, Kurup AS, World Health Organization. Equity, social determinants and public health programmes. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
19.
20.
21.
Novaes CO, Mattos IE. Prevalência e fatores associados a não utilização de mamografia em mulheres idosas. Cad Saúde Pública. 2009;25 Suppl 2:s310–20.CrossRef
22.
Haynes R, Pearce J, Barnett R. Cancer survival in New Zealand: ethnic, social and geographical inequalities. Soc Sci Med. 2008;67:928–37.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Mobley LR, Kuo TMM, Driscoll D, Clayton L, Anselin L. Heterogeneity in mammography use across the nation: separating evidence of disparities from the disproportionate effects of geography. Int J Health Geogr. 2008;7:32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Coughlin SS, Leadbetter S, Richards T, Sabatino SA. Contextual analysis of breast and cervical cancer screening and factors associated with health care access among United States women, 2002. Soc Sci Med. 2008;66(2):260–75.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast- cancer incidence. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(21):1998–2005.CrossRefPubMed
26.
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Recomendation Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016;12:1–19.
27.
Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, Herzig A, Michaelson JS, Shih YCT, et al. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk. Guideline update from the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2015;314(15):1599–614.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Vainio H, Bianchini F. Breast cancer screening, vol. 7. Lyon: IARC Press; 2002. p. 229.
29.
World Health Organization. Early detection. Geneva: WHO; 2007. 42 p. (Cancer control: knowledge into action: WHO guide for effective programmes; module 3).
30.
Brasil. Ministerio da Saude. Secretaria de Atenção a Saude. Departamento de Atenção Basica. Controle dos canceres do colo do utero e da mama. 2nd ed. Brasilia: Ministerio da Saude; 2013. 124 p.
31.
Pace LE, Keating NL. A systematic assessment of benefits and risks to guide breast cancer screening decisions. JAMA. 2014;311(13):1327–35.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Magnus MC, Ping M, Shen MM, Bourgeois J, Magnus JH. Effectiveness of mammography screening in reducing breast cancer mortality in women aged 39-49 years: a meta-analysis. J Womens Health. 2011;20(6):845–52.CrossRef
33.
Kalager M, Adami H-O, Bretthauer M, Tamimi RM. Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer due to mammography screening: results from the Norwegian screening program. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(7):491–9.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Rakowski W, Meissner H, Vernon S, Breen N, Rimer B, Clark MA. Correlates of repeat and recent mammograpgy for women ages 45 to 75 in the 2002 and 2003. Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2003). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkres Prev. 2006;15(11):2093–101.CrossRef
35.
Reyes-Ortiz CA, Freeman JL, Peláez M, Markides KS, Goodwin JS. Mammography use among older women of seven Latin American and Caribbean cities. Prev Med. 2006;42(5):375–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Ecob R, Davey Smith G. Income and health: what is the nature of the relationship? Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:693–705.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Solar O, Irwin A. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health: Social Determinants of Health. Discussion. Paper 2 (Policy and Practice). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
38.
Levesque JF, Harris MF, Russell G. Patient-centred access to health care: conceptualising access at the interface of health systems and populations. Int J Equity Health. 2013;12:18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
40.
Williams DR, Mohammed SA. Discrimination and racial disparities in health: evidence and needed research. J Behav Med. 2009;32(1):20–47.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Mishuris RG, Linder JA. Racial differences in cancer screening with electronic health records and electronic preventive care reminders. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(e2):e264–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
42.
Dailey AB, Kasl SV, Holford TR, Jones BA. Perceived racial discrimination and nonadherence to screening mammography guidelines: results from the race differences in the screening mammography process study. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165(11):1287–95.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Williams DR, Jackson PB. Social sources of racial disparities in health. Health Aff. 2005;24(2):325–34.CrossRef
44.
Azevedo e Silva G, Bustamante-Teixeira MT, Aquino EML, Tomazelli JG, Santos-Silva I. Access to early breast cancer diagnosis in the Brazilian Unified National Health System: an analysis of data from the Health Information System. Cad de Saúde Pública. 2014;30(7):1537–50.CrossRef
45.
Maruthappu M, Watkins J, Noor AM, Williams C, Ali R, Sullivan R, Zeltner T, Atun R. Economic downturns, universal health coverage, and cancer mortality in high-income and middle-income countries, 1990-2010: a longitudinal analysis. Lancet. 2016;388(10045):684–95.
46.
Autier P, Boniol M, LaVecchia C, Vatten L, Gavin A, Héry C, Heanue M. Disparities in breast cancer mortality trends between 30 European countries: retrospective trend analysis of WHO mortality database. BMJ. 2010;341:c3620.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
47.
48.
Autier P, Ouakrim DA. Determinants of the number of mammography units in 31 countries with significant mammography screening. Br J Cancer. 2008;99(7):1185–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Inequalities in socioeconomic status and race and the odds of undergoing a mammogram in Brazil
Authors
Enirtes Caetano Prates Melo
Evangelina Xavier Gouveia de Oliveira
Dóra Chor
Marilia Sá Carvalho
Rejane Sobrino Pinheiro
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1475-9276
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-016-0435-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research

Equity in the use of public services for mother and newborn child health care in Pakistan: a utilization incidence analysis

Research

Regional health-care inequity in children’s survival in Zhejiang Province, China

Research

Don’t ask for fair treatment? A gender analysis of ethnic discrimination, response to discrimination, and self-rated health among marriage migrants in South Korea

Research

Medical care ideals among urban and rural residents in Thailand: a qualitative study

Research

State budget transfers to Health Insurance Funds for universal health coverage: institutional design patterns and challenges of covering those outside the formal sector in Eastern European high-income countries

Research

How social policies can improve financial accessibility of healthcare: a multi-level analysis of unmet medical need in European countries