Advertisement

Journal of Public Health

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 229–240 | Cite as

Lower attendance rates in BreastScreen Norway among immigrants across all levels of socio-demographic factors: a population-based study

  • Mary Le
  • Solveig Hofvind
  • Kaitlyn Tsuruda
  • Tonje Braaten
  • Sameer BhargavaEmail author
Original Article
  • 104 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Several studies have shown that immigrants attend mammographic screening less frequently than non-immigrants. Studies have also shown that attendance is influenced by socio-demographic factors. We aimed to describe the relationship between socio-demographic factors and first attendance among immigrant and non-immigrant women invited to BreastScreen Norway.

Methods

Our cohort consisted of 885,979 women invited to BreastScreen Norway for their first time between 1996 and 2015. We merged individual-level socio-demographic data to attendance data corresponding to women’s first invitation to the program. Using Poisson regression, we calculated rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for attendance, stratified by region of origin. Covariates of interest included age, income, education level, employment status, marital status, citizenship and years since immigration, among others.

Results

Fifty-three percent of immigrants and 76% of non-immigrants attended mammographic screening after their first invitation; immigrants as a whole had lower attendance rates across all socio-demographic factors. However, the association between socio-demographic factors and attendance varied between immigrant groups. For all immigrants, no recorded education demonstrated the strongest association with non-attendance compared with ≤ 10 years recorded education (RRadj: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.67–0.71). Other factors associated with non-attendance were low income, living in Oslo, not being employed and being a recent immigrant.

Conclusion

The association between socio-demographic factors and mammographic screening attendance differed between immigrant groups. Further studies and preventive health measures should take into account that considering immigrants as a homogeneous group may lead to less effective interventions.

Keywords

Breast Cancer Ethnicity Health inequalities Screening Migration 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a grant from the Norwegian Breast Cancer Society, funded by the Norwegian ExtraFoundation for Health and Rehabilitation (2016/FO76429) (https://www.extrastiftelsen.no/logo/). The funding source had no involvement in the conduction of the study, interpretation of the results or preparation of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

The Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REC 2013/795) approved this study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

10389_2018_937_MOESM1_ESM.docx (18 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 18 kb)
10389_2018_937_MOESM2_ESM.docx (37 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 37 kb)

References

  1. Berens EM, Stahl L, Yilmaz-Aslan Y, Sauzet O, Spallek J, Razum O (2014) Participation in breast cancer screening among women of Turkish origin in Germany—a register-based study. BMC Womens Health 14:24.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-14-24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhargava S, Moen K, Qureshi SA, Hofvind S (2018) Mammographic screening attendance among immigrant and minority women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Radiol.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185118758132
  3. Bhargava S, Tsuruda K, Moen K, Bukholm I, Hofvind S (2017) Lower attendance rates in immigrant versus non-immigrant women in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Programme. J Med Screen:0969141317733771Google Scholar
  4. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F (2015) Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 136:E359–E386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. International Cancer Screening Network (2016) National Cancer Institute. Breast Cancer Screening Programs in 26 ICSN Countries, 2012: Organization, Policies, and Program Reach. 2 December 2016. http://healthcaredelivery.cancer.gov/icsn/breast/screening.html. Accessed 11 Jan 2018
  6. Lagerlund M, Maxwell AE, Bastani R, Thurfjell E, Ekbom A, Lambe M (2002) Sociodemographic predictors of non-attendance at invitational mammography screening–a population-based register study (Sweden). Cancer Causes Control 13:73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Latif F, Helgeland J, Bukholm G, Bukholm IRK (2015) Ethnicity differences in breast cancer stage at the time of diagnosis in Norway. Scand J Surg 104:248–253.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1457496914565420 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Bouvard V, Bianchini F, Straif K (2015) Breast-cancer screening—viewpoint of the IARC working group. N Engl J Med 372:2353–2358.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsr1504363 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Leinonen MK, Campbell S, Ursin G, Tropé A, Nygård M (2017) Barriers to cervical cancer screening faced by immigrants: a registry-based study of 1.4 million women in Norway. Eur J Pub Health 27:873–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Maheswaran R, Pearson T, Jordan H, Black D (2006) Socioeconomic deprivation, travel distance, location of service, and uptake of breast cancer screening in north Derbyshire, UK. J Epidemiol Community Health 60:208–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, Dewar JA, Thompson SG, Wilcox M, The Independent UKPoBCS (2013) The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review: a report jointly commissioned by Cancer Research UK and the Department of Health (England) October 2012. Br J Cancer 108:2205–2240.  https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.177 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. National Health Service (2017) Breast Screening Programme-England, 2015–2016: Report. Report, National Health Service Digital, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  13. Norredam M, Nielsen SS, Krasnik A (2009) Migrants’ utilization of somatic healthcare services in Europe—a systematic review. Eur J Pub Health 20:555–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. The Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program (2017), 1996–2016: Celebrating 20 years of organised mammographic screening. Cancer in Norway 2016-Cancer incidence, mortality, survival and prevalence in Norway. Report. Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  15. The Norwegian Tax Administration (2018) National ID number. http://www.skatteetaten.no/en/person/National-Registry/Birth-and-name-selection/Children-born-in-Norway/National-ID-number/. Accessed 11 Jan 2018
  16. Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L (2008) European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition—summary document. Ann Oncol 19:614–622.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdm481 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schueler KM, Chu PW, Smith-Bindman R (2008) Factors associated with mammography utilization: a systematic quantitative review of the literature. J Women’s Health (Larchmt) 17:1477–1498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sebuodegard S, Sagstad S, Hofvind S (2016) Attendance in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Programme. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 136:1448–1451.  https://doi.org/10.4045/tidsskr.15.1013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Statistics Norway (2017a) Employment among immigrants, register-based. 30 March 2017. http://www.ssb.no/en/arbeid-og-lonn/statistikker/innvregsys. Accessed 11 Jan 2018
  20. Statistics Norway (2017b) Immigrants and Norwegian-born to immigrant parents. 2 March 2017. https://www.ssb.no/en/innvbef. Accessed 12 Jan 2018
  21. Statistics Norway (2017c) Reasons for immigration. 19 June 2017. https://www.ssb.no/en/innvgrunn/. Accessed 12 January 2018
  22. Statistics Norway (2017d) Table 10489: Immigrants’ after-tax income per consumption unit, by country of origin 2009–2016. http://www.ssb.no/en/statbank/table/10489/?rxid=8fcfbc05-9fd7-469b-b9ca-3291f64f7415. Accessed 11 Jan 2018
  23. Thøgersen H, Møller B, Robsahm TE, Aaserud S, Babigumira R, Larsen IK (2017) Comparison of cancer stage distribution in the immigrant and host populations of Norway, 1990–2014. Int J Cancer 141:52–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vahabi M, Lofters A, Kumar M, Glazier RH (2016) Breast cancer screening disparities among immigrant women by world region of origin: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada. Cancer Med 5:1670–1686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weber MF, Chiew M, Feletto E, Kahn C, Sitas F, Webster L (2014) Cancer screening among immigrants living in urban and regional Australia: results from the 45 and up study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11:8251–8266.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110808251 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. World Health Organization (2018) Breast cancer: prevention and control. http://www.who.int/cancer/detection/breastcancer/en/index1.html. Accessed 11 Jan 2018
  27. Youlden DR, Cramb SM, Dunn NAM, Muller JM, Pyke CM, Baade PD (2012) The descriptive epidemiology of female breast cancer: an international comparison of screening, incidence, survival and mortality. Cancer Epidemiol 36:237–248.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2012.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zackrisson S, Andersson I, Manjer J, Janzon L (2004) Non-attendance in breast cancer screening is associated with unfavourable socio-economic circumstances and advanced carcinoma. Int J Cancer 108:754–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health SciencesUiT The Arctic University of NorwayTromsøNorway
  2. 2.The Cancer Registry of NorwayOsloNorway
  3. 3.Department of Life Sciences and Health, Faculty of Health SciencesOslo and Akershus University College of Applied SciencesOsloNorway
  4. 4.Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiTThe Arctic University of NorwayTromsøNorway
  5. 5.Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations