Cited by 70Colorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningHealth disparities and outcomes

Geographic variation and effect of area-level poverty rate on colorectal cancer screening

Open access
Lian, Min, Schootman, Mario, Yun, Shumei·2008·BMC Public Health

Abstract

Background: With a secular trend of increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, concerns about disparities in CRC screening also have been rising. It is unclear if CRC screening varies geographically, if area-level poverty rate affects CRC screening, and if individual-level characteristics mediate the area-level effects on CRC screening. Methods: Using 2006 Missouri Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data, a multilevel study was conducted to examine geographic variation and the effect of area-level poverty rate on CRC screening use among persons age 50 or older. Individuals were nested within ZIP codes (ZIP5 areas), which in turn, were nested within aggregations of ZIP codes (ZIP3 areas). Six groups of individual-level covariates were considered as potential mediators. Results: An estimated 51.8% of Missourians aged 50 or older adhered to CRC screening recommendations. Nearly 15% of the total variation in CRC screening lay between ZIP5 areas. Persons residing in ZIP5 areas with ≥ 10% of poverty rate had lower odds of CRC screening use than those residing in ZIP5 areas with <10% poverty rate (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.58–0.81; adjusted OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67–0.98). Persons who resided in ZIP3 areas with ≥ 20% poverty rate also had lower odds of following CRC screening guidelines than those residing in ZIP3 areas with <20% poverty rate (unadjusted OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52–0.83; adjusted OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50–0.83). Obesity, history of depression/anxiety and access to care were associated with CRC screening, but did not mediate the effect of area-level poverty on CRC screening. Conclusion: Large geographic variation of CRC screening exists in Missouri. Area-level poverty rate, independent of individual-level characteristics, is a significant predictor of CRC screening, but it only explains a small portion of the geographic heterogeneity of CRC screening. Individual-level factors we examined do not mediate the effect of the area-level poverty rate on CRC screening. Future studies should identify other area- and individual-level characteristics associated with CRC screening in Missouri.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1471-2458-8-358

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lian, M., Schootman, M., & Yun, S.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Barnes-Jewish Hospital (US)
  • Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (US)
Corresponding author
Schootman, Mario
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2008-10-16
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
358-358
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2155441572
Cited by
70
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center
  • National Cancer Institute (R21CA098594, CA 98594, CA9184206)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
colorectal cancer screening, regional variation, health disparities, screening adherence, obesity, anxiety and depression, health care access, mediation, Missouri
MeSH terms
Aged, Female, Geography, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Missouri, Poverty, Colorectal Neoplasms, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Healthcare Disparities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review