| Title |
Decreased Cancer Mortality-to-Incidence Ratios with Increased Accessibility of Federally Qualified Health Centers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Community Health, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10900-014-9978-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Swann Arp Adams, Seul Ki Choi, Leepao Khang, Dayna A. Campbell, Daniela B. Friedman, Jan M. Eberth, Russell E. Glasgow, Reginald Tucker-Seeley, Sudha Xirasagar, Mei Po Yip, Vicki M. Young, James R. Hébert |
| Abstract |
Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) offer primary and preventive healthcare, including cancer screening, for the nation's most vulnerable population. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between access to FQHCs and cancer mortality-to-incidence ratios (MIRs). One-way analysis of variance was conducted to compare the mean MIRs for breast, cervical, prostate, and colorectal cancers for each U.S. county for 2006-2010 by access to FQHCs (direct access, in-county FQHC; indirect access, adjacent-county FQHC; no access, no FQHC either in the county or in adjacent counties). ArcMap 10.1 software was used to map cancer MIRs and FQHC access levels. The mean MIRs for breast, cervical, and prostate cancer differed significantly across FQHC access levels (p < 0.05). In urban and healthcare professional shortage areas, mean MIRs decreased as FQHC access increased. A trend of lower breast and prostate cancer MIRs in direct access to FQHCs was found for all racial groups, but this trend was significant for whites only. States with a large proportion of rural and medically underserved areas had high mean MIRs, with correspondingly more direct FQHC access. Expanding FQHCs to more underserved areas and concentrations of disparity populations may have an important role in reducing cancer morbidity and mortality, as well as racial-ethnic disparities, in the United States. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 88 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 28 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 May 2018.
All research outputs
#7,395,784
of 24,059,832 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#427
of 1,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,085
of 360,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,059,832 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,702 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.