Macro-level factors impacting geographic disparities in cancer screening

Mobley, Lee R; Kuo, Tzy-Mey; Traczynski, Jeffrey; Udalova, Victoria; Frech, HE

doi:10.1186/s13561-014-0013-7

Health Economics Review

Table 6 Small-area regression results, poverty interaction

From: Macro-level factors impacting geographic disparities in cancer screening

	BC screening, 2003-2005				CRC screening, 2001-2005
	Base model		Interactions		Base model		Interactions
Variable	Coeff	Pval	Coeff	Pval	Coeff	Pval	Coeff	Pval
% Age 75-84 in FFS Medicare	-0.081	0.036	-0.074	0.052	0.010	0.773	0.004	0.914
% Age 85+ in FFS Medicare	-0.299	0.000	-0.299	0.000	-0.462	0.000	-0.470	0.000
% Dual or ESRD in FFS Medicare	-0.381	0.000	-0.405	0.000	-0.264	0.000	-0.280	0.000
% Black in FFS Medicare	0.107	0.000	0.121	0.000	0.076	0.000	0.085	0.000
% Hispanic in FFS Medicare	0.038	0.404	0.028	0.556	-0.016	0.624	-0.044	0.204
% Other race in FFS Medicare	-0.151	0.000	-0.109	0.000	0.030	0.136	0.053	0.012
% Mover in 2001-2005 in FFS Medicare	0.177	0.000	0.160	0.000	0.062	0.000	0.054	0.000
Average distance to closest provider	-0.035	0.000	-0.036	0.000	-0.040	0.000	-0.040	0.000
Managed care penetration	-0.016	0.131	-0.013	0.244	0.033	0.000	0.038	0.000
Population density in 2001 (in thousands)	-0.133	0.035	-0.162	0.010	0.100	0.054	0.094	0.069
% US population in poverty in 2001	-0.099	0.019	-0.437	0.000	-0.168	0.000	-0.343	0.000
% states allowing NP to practice and/or prescribe	-0.109	0.935	-0.432	0.749	-0.996	0.276	-1.181	0.216
% of counties with MD Shortage	-0.204	0.134	-0.166	0.225	0.075	0.422	0.092	0.346
% of Medicare population with Supplemental MediGap	-0.088	0.230	-0.083	0.260	-0.019	0.703	-0.015	0.774
REG 1 (R14 = 1, R25 = 1)¹	1.198	0.560	-4.204	0.064	3.771	0.007	1.034	0.520
REG 2 (R14 = 1)¹	1.358	0.578	-4.492	0.095	2.370	0.155	-1.753	0.360
Interaction REG1 with poverty			0.434	0.000			0.207	0.000
Interaction REG2 with poverty			0.442	0.000			0.297	0.000
Sum of direct and indirect tests			BC Model				CRC Model
			Joint effect	p-value			Joint effect	p-value
Effects of increasing poverty in REG1 states vs Unregulated states			-0.003	0.959			-0.136	0.000
Effects of increasing poverty in REG2 states vs Unregulated states			0.005	0.939			-0.046	0.293
Effects of increasing poverty in Unregulated states			-0.437	0.000			-0.343	0.000

¹We defined three insurance regulatory ‘regimes’ based on the combination of the two state insurance regulatory variables (R14, external review and R25, continuity of care).
Regime 1 (REG1) was defined as having both regulations in place (R14 = 1, R25 = 1). Regime 2 (REG2) was defined as having only one of these regulations in place (R14 = 1). Regime 3 (REG3) was the reference group in the estimation; it included all other states, which had neither regulation. See Table 7 for Regime Membership by States. Bold font indicates statistical significance at 95% confidence level.

Back to article page

ISSN: 2191-1991

Contact us

Submission enquiries: camille.lumabas@springernature.com
General enquiries: info@biomedcentral.com