↓ Skip to main content

Cancer screening inequities in a time of primary care reform: a population-based longitudinal study in Ontario, Canada

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
Title
Cancer screening inequities in a time of primary care reform: a population-based longitudinal study in Ontario, Canada
Published in
BMC Primary Care, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0827-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aisha K. Lofters, Amy Mark, Monica Taljaard, Michael E. Green, Richard H. Glazier, Simone Dahrouge

Abstract

Primary care has been reformed in recent years in Ontario, Canada, with a move away from traditional fee-for-service to enhanced fee-for-service and capitation-based models. It is unclear how new models have affected disparities in cancer screening. We evaluated whether Ontario's enhanced fee-for-service model was associated with a change in the gaps in cancer screening for people living with low income and people who are foreign-born. We conducted a population-based longitudinal analysis from 2002 to 2013 of Ontario family physicians who transitioned from traditional fee-for-service to enhanced fee-for-service. The binary outcomes of interest were adherence to cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening recommendations. Outcomes were analyzed using mixed-effects logistic regression. Analyses produced annual odds ratios comparing the odds of being up-to-date for screening among patients in enhanced fee-for-service versus patients in traditional fee-for-service for each social stratum separately. We calculated the ratios of stratum-specific odds ratios to assess whether the transition from traditional to enhanced fee-for-service was associated with a change in screening gaps between immigrants and long-term residents, and between people in the lowest and highest neighbourhood income quintiles. Throughout the study period, cancer screening was consistently lower among immigrants and among people in the lowest income quintile. Transition to enhanced fee-for-service was generally associated with increased screening uptake for all, however for most years, ratios of ratios were significantly less than 1 for all three cancer screening types, indicating that there was a widening of the screening gap between immigrants and long-term residents and between people living in the lowest vs. highest income quintile associated with transitions. The transition to enhanced fee-for-service in Ontario was generally associated with a widening of screening inequities for foreign-born and low-income patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 128 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 17%
Researcher 14 11%
Other 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 50 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 13%
Social Sciences 11 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 55 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 July 2022.
All research outputs
#5,168,664
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#714
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,667
of 344,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#13
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 344,555 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.