ABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVES</b>Cancer screening has become common in Japan. However, little is known about the socioeconomic factors affecting cancer screening participation. This study was performed to examine the association between socioeconomic status and cancer screening participation in Japanese males.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Using the data of 23,394 males sampled from across Japan, the associations between self-reported participation in screenings for three types of cancer (i.e., stomach, lung and colon) and socioeconomic variables, including marital status, types of residential area (metropolitan/nonmetropolitan), household income, and employment status, were examined using multilevel logistic regression by age group (40 to 64 and ≥65 years).</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The cancer screening participation rates were 34.5% (stomach), 21.3% (lung), and 24.8% (colon) for the total population studied. Being married, living in a nonmetropolitan area, having a higher income and being employed in a large-scale company showed independent associations with a higher rate of cancer screening participation for all three types of cancer. Income-related differences in cancer screening were more pronounced in the middle-aged population than in the elderly population, and in metropolitan areas than in nonmetropolitan areas.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>There are notable socioeconomic differences in cancer screening participation in Japan. To promote cancer screening, socioeconomic factors should be considered, particularly for middle-aged and urban residents.</p>
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Cancer screening has become common in Japan. However, little is known about the socioeconomic factors affecting cancer screening participation. This study was performed to examine the association between socioeconomic status and cancer screening participation in Japanese males. Methods: Using the data of 23,394 males sampled from across Japan, the associations between self-reported participation in screenings for three types of cancer (i.e., stomach, lung and colon) and socioeconomic variables, including marital status, types of residential area (metropolitan/nonmetropolitan), household income, and employment status, were examined using multilevel logistic regression by age group (40 to 64 and ³65 years). Results: The cancer screening participation rates were 34.5% (stomach), 21.3% (lung), and 24.8% (colon) for the total population studied. Being married, living in a nonmetropolitan area, having a higher income and being employed in a large-scale company showed independent associations with a higher rate of cancer screening participation for all three types of cancer. Income-related differences in cancer screening were more pronounced in the middle-aged population than in the elderly population, and in metropolitan areas than in nonmetropolitan areas. Conclusions: There are notable socioeconomic differences in cancer screening participation in Japan. To promote cancer screening, socioeconomic factors should be considered, particularly for middle-aged and urban residents.
Subject(s)
Social Class , JapanABSTRACT
The aims of this study were to demonstrate the trend of overall mortality rate and premature mortality rate for select types of cancer in Japan and to assess the utility as a target indicator. The age-adjusted mortality rate for the total population (overall mortality rate) and that for persons under 65 years of age (under 65 mortality rate) for stomach cancer, liver cancer and lung cancer from 1950 to 1997 in Japan were calculated. Moreover, the turning point year of the mortality trend was estimated using a regression model of the rate of annual increase in each mortality rate. As the results show, a decline in the under 65 mortality rate preceding a decline in the overall mortality rate was observed in stomach cancer and male liver cancer. Also, the under 65 mortality rate due to lung cancer seemed to begin to decline in recent years for males, while the overall mortality rate has been increasing. This study suggests that the premature mortality rate is a more sensitive indicator of the effectiveness of cancer prevention. Hence, because of not only the larger burden of premature deaths but also the sensitivity, premature mortality is considered to be suitable as a target indicator for cancer prevention strategies.