The interaction between social determinants of health and cervical cancer survival: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to investigate what are the most relevant social determinants of health (SDH), how they are measured, how they interact among themselves and what is their impact on the outcomes of cervical cancer patients. METHODS: Search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases from January 2001 to September 2022. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022346854). We followed the PICOS strategy: Population- Patients treated for cervical cancer in the United States; Intervention - Any SDH; Comparison- None; Outcome measures- Cancer treatment outcomes related to the survival of the patients; Types of studies- Observational studies. Two reviewers extracted the data following the PRISMA guidelines. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies was used for risk of bias (ROB) assessment. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included (22 had low and 2 had moderate ROB). Most manuscripts analyzed data from public registries (83.3%) and only one SDH (54.17%). The SDH category of Neighborhood was not included in any study. Although the SDH were measured differently across the studies, not being married, receiving treatment at a low-volume hospital, and having public insurance (Medicaid or Medicare) or not being insured was associated with shorter survival of cervical cancer patients in most studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a deficit in the number of studies comprehensively assessing the impact of SDH on cervical cancer treatment-related outcomes. Marital status, hospital volume and health insurance status are potential predictors of worse outcome.

Disparities in survival of hematologic malignancies in the context of social determinants of health: a systematic review.

Social determinants of health (SDHs) have been reported as relevant factors responsible for health inequity. We sought to assess clinical data from observational studies conducted in the United States evaluating the impact of SDHs on the outcomes of patients with hematologic malignancies. Thus, we performed a systematic review in 6 databases on 1 September 2021, in which paired reviewers independently screened studies and included data from 41 studies. We assessed the risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools and analyzed the data using a descriptive synthesis. The most common SDH domains explored were health care access and quality (54.3%) and economic stability (25.6%); others investigated were education (19%) and social and community context (7.8%). We identified strong evidence of 5 variables significantly affecting survival: lack of health insurance coverage or having Medicare or Medicaid insurance, receiving cancer treatment at a nonacademic facility, low household income, low education level, and being unmarried. In contrast, the reports on the effect of distance traveled to the treatment center are contradictory. Other SDHs examined were facility volume, provider expertise, poverty, and employment rates. We identified a lack of data in the literature in terms of transportation, debt, higher education, diet, social integration, environmental factors, or stress. Our results underscore the complex nature of social, financial, and health care barriers as intercorrelated variables. Therefore, the management of hematologic malignancies needs concerted efforts to incorporate SDHs into clinical care, research, and public health policies, identifying and addressing the barriers at a patient-based level to enhance outcome equity (PROSPERO CRD42022346854).