↓ Skip to main content

Impact of socioeconomic status on cancer incidence and stage at diagnosis: selected findings from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results: National Longitudinal Mortality Study

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Causes and Control, November 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
411 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
281 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Impact of socioeconomic status on cancer incidence and stage at diagnosis: selected findings from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results: National Longitudinal Mortality Study
Published in
Cancer Causes and Control, November 2008
DOI 10.1007/s10552-008-9256-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Limin X. Clegg, Marsha E. Reichman, Barry A. Miller, Benjamin F. Hankey, Gopal K. Singh, Yi Dan Lin, Marc T. Goodman, Charles F. Lynch, Stephen M. Schwartz, Vivien W. Chen, Leslie Bernstein, Scarlett L. Gomez, John J. Graff, Charles C. Lin, Norman J. Johnson, Brenda K. Edwards

Abstract

Population-based cancer registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) are mainly based on medical records and administrative information. Individual-level socioeconomic data are not routinely reported by cancer registries in the United States because they are not available in patient hospital records. The U.S. representative National Longitudinal Mortality Study (NLMS) data provide self-reported, detailed demographic and socioeconomic data from the Social and Economic Supplement to the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey (CPS). In 1999, the NCI initiated the SEER-NLMS study, linking the population-based SEER cancer registry data to NLMS data. The SEER-NLMS data provide a new unique research resource that is valuable for health disparity research on cancer burden. We describe the design, methods, and limitations of this data set. We also present findings on cancer-related health disparities according to individual-level socioeconomic status (SES) and demographic characteristics for all cancers combined and for cancers of the lung, breast, prostate, cervix, and melanoma. Records of cancer patients diagnosed in 1973-2001 when residing 1 of 11 SEER registries were linked with 26 NLMS cohorts. The total number of SEER matched cancer patients that were also members of an NLMS cohort was 26,844. Of these 26,844 matched patients, 11,464 were included in the incidence analyses and 15,357 in the late-stage diagnosis analyses. Matched patients (used in the incidence analyses) and unmatched patients were compared by age group, sex, race, ethnicity, residence area, year of diagnosis, and cancer anatomic site. Cohort-based age-adjusted cancer incidence rates were computed. The impact of socioeconomic status on cancer incidence and stage of diagnosis was evaluated. Men and women with less than a high school education had elevated lung cancer rate ratios of 3.01 and 2.02, respectively, relative to their college educated counterparts. Those with family annual incomes less than $12,500 had incidence rates that were more than 1.7 times the lung cancer incidence rate of those with incomes $50,000 or higher. Lower income was also associated with a statistically significantly increased risk of distant-stage breast cancer among women and distant-stage prostate cancer among men. Socioeconomic patterns in incidence varied for specific cancers, while such patterns for stage were generally consistent across cancers, with late-stage diagnoses being associated with lower SES. These findings illustrate the potential for analyzing disparities in cancer outcomes according to a variety of individual-level socioeconomic, demographic, and health care characteristics, as well as by area measures available in the linked database.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 281 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
Canada 3 1%
United Kingdom 3 1%
Italy 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Unknown 264 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 18%
Student > Master 36 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 27 10%
Student > Bachelor 24 9%
Other 90 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 128 46%
Unspecified 39 14%
Social Sciences 33 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 6%
Other 44 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 02 October 2018.
All research outputs
#1,569,136
of 13,185,699 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes and Control
#230
of 1,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,676
of 121,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes and Control
#6
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,185,699 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 121,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.