Validity of geographic-level social determinant of health metrics in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Endocrine oncology (Bristol, England) Pub Date : 2025-05-15 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1530/EO-25-0029
Andrea Gillis, Brendon Herring, Rachael Guenter, Weisheng Chen, Dai Chen, Herbert Chen, John Bart Rose, Upender Manne, Smita Bhatia
{"title":"Validity of geographic-level social determinant of health metrics in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.","authors":"Andrea Gillis, Brendon Herring, Rachael Guenter, Weisheng Chen, Dai Chen, Herbert Chen, John Bart Rose, Upender Manne, Smita Bhatia","doi":"10.1530/EO-25-0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Various social determinants of health (SDOH) metrics, also known as area-based social measures, are utilized to evaluate access to cancer care and to explain disparities in outcomes. Little prior work has compared the validity of these various geographic metrics. We reviewed all patients surgically treated for PNETs (2006-2022) at a single comprehensive cancer center. We collected patient demographics including self-reported race (White or Black), billing addresses, tumor characteristics and area-based social measures. We then compared between- and within-race differences to understand accuracy across different geographic levels. One hundred seventy-nine patients were included; 49 (27%) Black, a median age of 60.3 years and 86 (48%) females. At the block group/census tract level, compared to White patients, Black patients lived in neighborhoods with lower educational attainment, lower income, higher rates of uninsurance, higher overall social vulnerability index (SVI), and higher area deprivation index (ADI) (all <i>P</i> < 0.05). These differences, however, were masked when examining county-level area-based social measures. Compared to census block group/tract-level data, for White patients, zip code-level metrics underestimated income and overestimated uninsurance level (<i>P</i> < 0.05). County-level metrics underestimated White patients' income and education level but overestimated poverty, uninsurance rate and SVI (all <i>P</i> < 0.05). For Black patients, zip code-level metrics overestimated poverty and uninsurance rates (<i>P</i> < 0.05); the only inaccurate county-level metric was overestimation of SVI (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Black patients with PNETs experience more vulnerable area-based social measures, a disparity which may be hidden when analyzing large geographic metrics.</p>","PeriodicalId":72907,"journal":{"name":"Endocrine oncology (Bristol, England)","volume":"5 1","pages":"e250029"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12084819/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endocrine oncology (Bristol, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1530/EO-25-0029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Various social determinants of health (SDOH) metrics, also known as area-based social measures, are utilized to evaluate access to cancer care and to explain disparities in outcomes. Little prior work has compared the validity of these various geographic metrics. We reviewed all patients surgically treated for PNETs (2006-2022) at a single comprehensive cancer center. We collected patient demographics including self-reported race (White or Black), billing addresses, tumor characteristics and area-based social measures. We then compared between- and within-race differences to understand accuracy across different geographic levels. One hundred seventy-nine patients were included; 49 (27%) Black, a median age of 60.3 years and 86 (48%) females. At the block group/census tract level, compared to White patients, Black patients lived in neighborhoods with lower educational attainment, lower income, higher rates of uninsurance, higher overall social vulnerability index (SVI), and higher area deprivation index (ADI) (all P < 0.05). These differences, however, were masked when examining county-level area-based social measures. Compared to census block group/tract-level data, for White patients, zip code-level metrics underestimated income and overestimated uninsurance level (P < 0.05). County-level metrics underestimated White patients' income and education level but overestimated poverty, uninsurance rate and SVI (all P < 0.05). For Black patients, zip code-level metrics overestimated poverty and uninsurance rates (P < 0.05); the only inaccurate county-level metric was overestimation of SVI (P < 0.001). Black patients with PNETs experience more vulnerable area-based social measures, a disparity which may be hidden when analyzing large geographic metrics.

胰腺神经内分泌肿瘤健康指标的地理水平社会决定因素的有效性。
各种健康社会决定因素(SDOH)指标,也称为基于区域的社会措施,用于评估获得癌症治疗的机会并解释结果的差异。之前很少有研究比较这些不同地理指标的有效性。我们回顾了在单一综合癌症中心接受PNETs手术治疗的所有患者(2006-2022)。我们收集了患者的人口统计资料,包括自我报告的种族(白人或黑人)、账单地址、肿瘤特征和基于区域的社会措施。然后,我们比较了种族之间和种族内部的差异,以了解不同地理水平的准确性。纳入179例患者;黑人49人(27%),中位年龄60.3岁,女性86人(48%)。在街区组/人口普区水平上,与白人患者相比,黑人患者居住在受教育程度较低、收入较低、无保险率较高、总体社会脆弱性指数(SVI)较高、区域剥夺指数(ADI)较高的社区(P < 0.05)。然而,在检查县级地区社会指标时,这些差异被掩盖了。与人口普查街区/地区水平的数据相比,对于白人患者,邮政编码水平的指标低估了收入,高估了未保险水平(P < 0.05)。县级指标低估了白人患者的收入和教育水平,但高估了贫困、未参保率和SVI(均P < 0.05)。对于黑人患者,邮政编码水平的指标高估了贫困率和未参保率(P < 0.05);唯一不准确的县级指标是SVI的高估(P < 0.001)。患有PNETs的黑人患者更容易受到基于区域的社会措施的影响,这种差异在分析大的地理指标时可能被隐藏起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信