↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to and delays in accessing breast cancer care among New Zealand women: disparities by ethnicity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Barriers to and delays in accessing breast cancer care among New Zealand women: disparities by ethnicity
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1050-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lis Ellison-Loschmann, Ridvan Firestone, Lucy Aquilina, Fiona McKenzie, Michelle Gray, Mona Jeffreys

Abstract

Unequal access to health care contributes to disparities in cancer outcomes. We examined the ethnic disparity in barriers to accessing primary and specialist health care experienced by New Zealand women with breast cancer. Women diagnosed with a primary invasive breast cancer between 2005 and 2007 were eligible. There were 1,799 respondents, n = 302 Māori (the indigenous population of NZ), n = 70 Pacific and n = 1,427 non-Māori/non-Pacific women. Participants completed a questionnaire listing 12 barriers grouped into three domains for analysis: personal; practical; and health care process factors, and reported the number of days between seeing a primary and a specialist care provider. Chi-squared, Fisher exact tests and logistic regression were used to assess uni- and multivariable differences in prevalence between ethnic groupings. The prevalence of reporting three or more barriers was 18 % among Pacific, 10 % among Māori and 3 % among non-Māori/non-Pacific women (P <0.001). The most commonly reported barriers were fear (Māori women) and cost (Pacific and non-Māori/non-Pacific women). Ethnic differences in reported barriers were not explained by deprivation or diabetes prevalence. Women with diabetes reported a two-fold higher risk of experiencing barriers to care compared to those without diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.06, 95%CI 1.20 to 3.57). Māori and Pacific women were more likely to face delays (median 14 days) in seeing a specialist than non-Māori/non-Pacific women (median 7 days); these differences were not explained by the reported barriers. Patterns of reported barriers to care differed according to ethnicity and were not explained by deprivation, or presence of co-morbidity. Māori and Pacific women are more likely to experience barriers to breast cancer care compared to non- Māori/non-Pacific women. We identified two key barriers affecting care for Māori and Pacific women; (a) delays in follow-up, and (b) the impact of co-morbid conditions. Future New Zealand work needs to focus attention on health care process factors and improving the interface between primary and secondary care to ensure quality health care is realised for all women with breast cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Master 10 11%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 39 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 16%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Psychology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 36 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2020.
All research outputs
#4,077,110
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,880
of 7,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,958
of 272,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#24
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,637 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 272,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.