Inequalities in cervical cancer screening for women with or without a regular consulting in primary care for gynaecological health, in Paris, France

Preventive Medicine

Volumn 54, Issue 3-4, 2012, Pages 259-265

  Grillo, Francesca ^a,b   Vallée, Julie ^c   Chauvin, Pierre ^a,b  

^a INSERM   (France)

^b SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

^c CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

Cervical smear; Gynaecological care; Neighbourhood of residence; Practitioner density; Primary health care; Residence characteristics; Women's health

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONSULTATION; DEMOGRAPHY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; FRANCE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; GYNECOLOGIC CARE; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MIGRATION; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SOCIOECONOMICS; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HEALTHCARE DISPARITIES; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MARITAL STATUS; MIDDLE AGED; PARIS; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84859000186     PISSN: 00917435     EISSN: 10960260     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.01.013     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Ackerson K., Preston S.D. A decision theory perspective on why women do or do not decide to have cancer screening: systematic review. J. Adv. Nurs. 2009, 65:1130-1140.
2. Ackerson K., Pohl J., Low L.K. Personal influencing factors associated with Pap smear testing and cervical cancer. Policy Polit. Nurs. Pract. 2008, 9:50-60.
3. ANAES Conduite à tenir devant un patient ayant un frottis cervico-utérin anormal. Actualisation. Recommandations pour la pratique clinique 2002, Agence nationale d'accréditation et d'évaluation en santé, Paris.
4. Baker D., Middleton E. Cervical screening and health inequality in England in the 1990s. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2003, 57:417-423.
5. Behbakht K., Lynch A., Teal S., Degeest K., Massad S. Social and cultural barriers to Papanicolaou test screening in an urban population. Obstet. Gynecol. 2004, 104:1355-1361.
6. Belot A., Grosclaude P., Bossard N., et al. Cancer incidence and mortality in France over the period 1980-2005. Rev. Epidemiol. Sante Publique 2008, 56:159-175.
7. Benjamins M.R., Kirby J.B., Bond Huie S.A. County characteristics and racial and ethnic disparities in the use of preventive services. Prev. Med. 2004, 39:704-712.
8. Borras J.M., Guillen M., Sanchez V., Junca S., Vicente R. Educational level, voluntary private health insurance and opportunistic cancer screening among women in Catalonia (Spain). Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 1999, 8:427-434.
9. Bowman J.A., Sanson-Fisher R., Redman S. The accuracy of self-reported Pap smear utilisation. Soc. Sci. Med. 1997, 44:969-976.
10. Breitkopf C.R., Pearson H.C., Breitkopf D.M. Poor knowledge regarding the Pap test among low-income women undergoing routine screening. Perspect. Sex Reprod. Health 2005, 37:78-84.
11. Cabeza E., Esteva M., Pujol A., Thomas V., Sanchez-Contador C. Social disparities in breast and cervical cancer preventive practices. Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 2007, 16:372-379.
12. Calle E.E., Flanders W.D., Thun M.J., Martin L.M. Demographic predictors of mammography and Pap smear screening in US women. Am. J. Public Health 1993, 83:53-60.
13. Chaix B., Bobashev G., Merlo J., Chauvin P. Re: "Detecting patterns of occupational illness clustering with alternating logistic regressions applied to longitudinal data". Am. J. Epidemiol. 2004, 160:505-506. (author reply 506-7).
14. Chevreul K., Durand-Zaleski I., Bahrami S.B., Hernandez-Quevedo C., Mladovsky P. France: health system review. Health Syst. Transit. 2010, 12:1-291.
15. Coughlin S.S., King J., Richards T.B., Ekwueme D.U. Cervical cancer screening among women in metropolitan areas of the United States by individual-level and area-based measures of socioeconomic status, 2000 to 2002. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2006, 15:2154-2159.
16. Coughlin S.S., Leadbetter S., Richards T., Sabatino S.A. Contextual analysis of breast and cervical cancer screening and factors associated with health care access among United States women, 2002. Soc. Sci. Med. 2008, 66:260-275.
17. Datta G.D., Colditz G.A., Kawachi I., Subramanian S.V., Palmer J.R., Rosenberg L. Individual-, neighborhood-, and state-level socioeconomic predictors of cervical carcinoma screening among U.S. black women: a multilevel analysis. Cancer 2006, 106:664-669.
18. De Alba I., Hubbell F.A., McMullin J.M., Sweningson J.M., Saitz R. Impact of U.S. citizenship status on cancer screening among immigrant women. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2005, 20:290-296.
19. Dourgnon P., Jusot F., Sermet C., Silva J. Le recours aux soins de ville des immigrés en France. Questions d'économie de la santé 2009, 146:1-6.
20. Duport N. Données épidémiologiques sur le cancer du col de l'utérus - État des connaissances - Actualisation 2008 2008, Institut de veille sanitaire, Saint-Maurice, France.
21. European Union Council Council recommendation of 2 December 2003 on cancer screening. Off. J. Eur. Union 2003, 878(EC: L327):34-35.
22. FGOLF (Fédération des gynécologues et obstétriciens de langue française) Conférence de consensus sur le dépistage du cancer du col de utérin. XXXIII Congrès de la Fédération des Gynécologues et obstétriciens de langue française. Lille 5-6-7-8 septembre 1990. J. Gynecol. Obstet. Biol. Reprod. 1990, 19:1-16.
23. Baromètre santé 2005. Premiers résultats 2006, INPES, Saint Denis, France. P. Guilbert, A. Gautier (Eds.).
24. HAS (Haute Autorité de Santé) Etat des lieux et recommandations pour le dépistage du cancer du col de l'utérus en France, Saint Denis, France 2010.
25. Hewitt M., Devesa S.S., Breen N. Cervical cancer screening among U.S. women: analyses of the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Prev. Med. 2004, 39:270-278.
26. IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer), GLOBOCAN Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide in 2008 2008, (Accessed November 29, 2011). http://globocan.iarc.fr/factsheets/cancers/cervix.asp.
27. Kreuger F.A., van Oers H.A., Nijs H.G. Cervical cancer screening: spatial associations of outcome and risk factors in Rotterdam. Publ. Health 1999, 113:111-115.
28. Kroll L.E. XTMRHO: Stata module to calculate intra-class correlations after xtmixed xtmelogit and xtmepoisson 2010, (Accessed November 29, 2011). http://fmwww.bc.edu/repec/bocode/x/xtmrho.ado.
29. Majeed F.A., Cook D.G., Anderson H.R., Hilton S., Bunn S., Stones C. Using patient and general practice characteristics to explain variations in cervical smear uptake rates. BMJ 1994, 308:1272-1276.
30. Mamoon H., Taylor R., Morrell S., Wain G., Moore H. Cervical screening: population-based comparisons between self-reported survey and registry-derived Pap test rates. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health 2001, 25:505-510.
31. Oscarsson M.G., Benzein E.G., Wijma B.E. Reasons for non-attendance at cervical screening as reported by non-attendees in Sweden. J. Psychosom. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2008, 29:23-31.
32. Préteceille E. La division sociale de l'éspace francilien 2003, Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques-CNRS, Paris, France.
33. Renahy E., Parizot I., Chauvin P. Health information seeking on the Internet: a double divide? Results from a representative survey in the Paris metropolitan area, France, 2005-2006. BMC Publ. Health 2008, 8:69.
34. Rigal L., Saurel-Cubizolles M.J., Falcoff H., Bouyer J., Ringa V. Do social inequalities in cervical cancer screening persist among patients who use primary care? The Paris Prevention in General Practice Survey. Prev. Med. 2011, 53:199-202.
35. Sambamoorthi U., McAlpine D.D. Racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and access disparities in the use of preventive services among women. Prev. Med. 2003, 37:475-484.
36. Segnan N. Socioeconomic status and cancer screening. IARC Sci. Publ. 1997, 138:369-376.
37. Vallee J., Cadot E., Grillo F., Parizot I., Chauvin P. The combined effects of activity space and neighbourhood of residence on participation in preventive health-care activities: the case of cervical screening in the Paris metropolitan area (France). Health Place 2010, 16:838-852.
38. Vallee J., Cadot E., Roustit C., Parizot I., Chauvin P. The role of daily mobility in mental health inequalities: the interactive influence of activity space and neighbourhood of residence on depression. Soc. Sci. Med. 2011, 73:1133-1144.
39. Weinstein N.D. Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to health problems: conclusions from a community-wide sample. J. Behav. Med. 1987, 10:481-500.