农村和城市在接受预防性保健服务方面的差异:不同农村地区之间观察到的关系差异。

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Journal of Public Health Research Pub Date : 2024-03-18 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/22799036241238670
Brittney M Calatayud, Jennifer L Moss
{"title":"农村和城市在接受预防性保健服务方面的差异:不同农村地区之间观察到的关系差异。","authors":"Brittney M Calatayud, Jennifer L Moss","doi":"10.1177/22799036241238670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rural residents are generally less likely to receive preventive healthcare than are urban residents, but variable measurement of rurality introduces inconsistency to these findings. We assessed the relationships between perceived and objective measures of rurality and uptake of preventive healthcare. In our sample, rural participants generally had equal or higher uptake of healthcare (i.e. private health insurance, check-up in the past year, being up-to-date on colorectal and cervical cancer screening) than urban participants. Importantly, the perceived measure of rurality performed similarly to the objective measures, suggesting that participant report could be a valid way to assess rurality in health studies. Significance for Public Health The ability to access routine preventive healthcare is a key component of public health. Comparing uptake of cancer screening in rural versus urban areas is one way to assess equity of healthcare access. Generally, rural areas have a higher burden of cancer than urban areas. The built environment, socioeconomic status, and patient perceptions can impact an individual's access to routine cancer screening. Preventive healthcare is of great importance to public health as a whole because screening can facilitate earlier diagnosis and more successful treatment for many preventable cancers, which may ultimately increase the quality and quantity of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":45958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Research","volume":"13 1","pages":"22799036241238670"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10949549/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rural/Urban differences in uptake of preventive healthcare services: Variability in observed relationships across measures of rurality.\",\"authors\":\"Brittney M Calatayud, Jennifer L Moss\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/22799036241238670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Rural residents are generally less likely to receive preventive healthcare than are urban residents, but variable measurement of rurality introduces inconsistency to these findings. We assessed the relationships between perceived and objective measures of rurality and uptake of preventive healthcare. In our sample, rural participants generally had equal or higher uptake of healthcare (i.e. private health insurance, check-up in the past year, being up-to-date on colorectal and cervical cancer screening) than urban participants. Importantly, the perceived measure of rurality performed similarly to the objective measures, suggesting that participant report could be a valid way to assess rurality in health studies. Significance for Public Health The ability to access routine preventive healthcare is a key component of public health. Comparing uptake of cancer screening in rural versus urban areas is one way to assess equity of healthcare access. Generally, rural areas have a higher burden of cancer than urban areas. The built environment, socioeconomic status, and patient perceptions can impact an individual's access to routine cancer screening. Preventive healthcare is of great importance to public health as a whole because screening can facilitate earlier diagnosis and more successful treatment for many preventable cancers, which may ultimately increase the quality and quantity of life.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Health Research\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"22799036241238670\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10949549/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Health Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/22799036241238670\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22799036241238670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与城市居民相比,农村居民接受预防性医疗保健的可能性通常较低,但由于对农村地区的衡量标准各不相同,因此这些研究结果并不一致。我们评估了农村居民的感知和客观衡量标准与接受预防性医疗保健之间的关系。在我们的样本中,与城市居民相比,农村居民一般具有同等或更高的医疗保健摄取量(即私人医疗保险、过去一年的体检、最新的大肠癌和宫颈癌筛查)。重要的是,农村人口的感知测量结果与客观测量结果相似,这表明在健康研究中,参与者的报告可以作为评估农村人口的有效方法。对公共卫生的意义 获得常规预防保健的能力是公共卫生的一个关键组成部分。比较农村地区和城市地区癌症筛查的接受率是评估医疗服务公平性的一种方法。一般来说,农村地区的癌症负担高于城市地区。建筑环境、社会经济地位和患者的看法都会影响个人接受常规癌症筛查的机会。预防性医疗保健对整个公共卫生具有重要意义,因为筛查可以促进对许多可预防癌症的早期诊断和更成功的治疗,从而最终提高生命的质量和数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rural/Urban differences in uptake of preventive healthcare services: Variability in observed relationships across measures of rurality.

Rural residents are generally less likely to receive preventive healthcare than are urban residents, but variable measurement of rurality introduces inconsistency to these findings. We assessed the relationships between perceived and objective measures of rurality and uptake of preventive healthcare. In our sample, rural participants generally had equal or higher uptake of healthcare (i.e. private health insurance, check-up in the past year, being up-to-date on colorectal and cervical cancer screening) than urban participants. Importantly, the perceived measure of rurality performed similarly to the objective measures, suggesting that participant report could be a valid way to assess rurality in health studies. Significance for Public Health The ability to access routine preventive healthcare is a key component of public health. Comparing uptake of cancer screening in rural versus urban areas is one way to assess equity of healthcare access. Generally, rural areas have a higher burden of cancer than urban areas. The built environment, socioeconomic status, and patient perceptions can impact an individual's access to routine cancer screening. Preventive healthcare is of great importance to public health as a whole because screening can facilitate earlier diagnosis and more successful treatment for many preventable cancers, which may ultimately increase the quality and quantity of life.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Public Health Research
Journal of Public Health Research PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.30%
发文量
116
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Health Research (JPHR) is an online Open Access, peer-reviewed journal in the field of public health science. The aim of the journal is to stimulate debate and dissemination of knowledge in the public health field in order to improve efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency of public health interventions to improve health outcomes of populations. This aim can only be achieved by adopting a global and multidisciplinary approach. The Journal of Public Health Research publishes contributions from both the “traditional'' disciplines of public health, including hygiene, epidemiology, health education, environmental health, occupational health, health policy, hospital management, health economics, law and ethics as well as from the area of new health care fields including social science, communication science, eHealth and mHealth philosophy, health technology assessment, genetics research implications, population-mental health, gender and disparity issues, global and migration-related themes. In support of this approach, JPHR strongly encourages the use of real multidisciplinary approaches and analyses in the manuscripts submitted to the journal. In addition to Original research, Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, Meta-synthesis and Perspectives and Debate articles, JPHR publishes newsworthy Brief Reports, Letters and Study Protocols related to public health and public health management activities.
×
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