4.7 Article

Explaining racial and ethnic disparities in cholesterol screening

期刊

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
卷 65, 期 -, 页码 65-69

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.026

关键词

Cholesterol screening; Race and ethnicity; Health disparities; Access to health care

资金

  1. Center for Advancing Equity in Clinical Preventive Services, from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [P01HS021141]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To determine whether racial and ethnic disparities in cholesterol screening persist after controlling for socioeconomic status, access to care and language. Methods. Data were obtained from the 2011 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for men aged 35 and older and women aged 45 and older in accordance with the United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Self-reported cholesterol screening data are presented for 389,039 respondents reflecting over 141 million people. Sequential logistic regression models of the likelihood of never having been screened are presented adjusted for demographic characteristics, health status, behavioral risk factors, socioeconomic status, health care access, and questionnaire language. Results. A total of 9.1% of respondents, reflecting almost 13 million individuals, reported never having been screened. After adjustment for socioeconomic status, health care access and Spanish language, disparities between whites and Blacks and Hispanics, but not Asians and Pacific Islanders, were eliminated. Conclusions. Lower socioeconomic status, lack of healthcare access and language barriers explained most of the racial and ethnic disparities in cholesterol screening. Expanding insurance coverage, simplifying cardiac risk assessment and improving access to culturally and linguistically appropriate care hold the greatest promise for improving cardiovascular disease screening and treatment for vulnerable populations. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据