Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Mar;46(3):228-36.
doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.10.023.

Understanding current racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening in the United States: the contribution of socioeconomic status and access to care

Affiliations

Understanding current racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening in the United States: the contribution of socioeconomic status and access to care

David T Liss et al. Am J Prev Med. 2014 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Prior studies have shown racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening but have not provided a full national picture of disparities across all major racial/ethnic groups.

Purpose: To provide a more complete, up-to-date picture of racial/ethnic disparities in CRC screening and contributing socioeconomic and access barriers.

Methods: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 2010 were analyzed in 2013. Hispanic/Latino participants were stratified by preferred language (Hispanic-English versus Hispanic-Spanish). Non-Hispanics were categorized as White, Black, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or American Indian/Alaska Native. Sequential regression models estimated adjusted relative risks (RRs) and the degree to which SES and access to care explained disparities.

Results: Overall, 59.6% reported being up-to-date on CRC screening. Self-reported CRC screening was highest in the White (62.0%) racial/ethnic group; followed by Black (59.0%); Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (54.6%); Hispanic-English (52.5%); American Indian/Alaska Native (49.5%); Asian (47.2%); and Hispanic-Spanish (30.6%) groups. Adjustment for SES and access partially explained disparities between Whites and Hispanic-Spanish (final relative risk [RR]=0.76, 95% CI=0.69, 0.83); Hispanic-English (RR=0.94, 95% CI=0.91, 0.98); and American Indian/Alaska Native (RR=0.91, 95% CI=0.85, 0.97) groups. The RR of screening among Asians was unchanged after adjustment for SES and access (0.78, p<0.001). After full adjustment, screening rates were not significantly different among Whites, Blacks, or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders.

Conclusions: Large racial/ethnic disparities in CRC screening persist, including substantial differences between English-speaking versus Spanish-speaking Hispanics. Disparities are only partially explained by SES and access to care. Future studies should explore the low rate of screening among Asians and how it varies by racial/ethnic subgroup and language.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources