Modelling preventive effectiveness to estimate the equity tipping point: at what coverage can individual preventive interventions reduce socioeconomic disparities in diabetes risk?

D G Manuel, T H Ho, S Harper, G M Anderson, J Lynch, L C Rosella
{"title":"Modelling preventive effectiveness to estimate the equity tipping point: at what coverage can individual preventive interventions reduce socioeconomic disparities in diabetes risk?","authors":"D G Manuel,&nbsp;T H Ho,&nbsp;S Harper,&nbsp;G M Anderson,&nbsp;J Lynch,&nbsp;L C Rosella","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Most individual preventive therapies potentially narrow or widen health disparities depending on the difference in community effectiveness across socioeconomic position (SEP). The equity tipping point (defined as the point at which health disparities become larger) can be calculated by varying components of community effectiveness such as baseline risk of disease, intervention coverage and/or intervention efficacy across SEP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a simple modelling approach to estimate the community effectiveness of diabetes prevention across SEP in Canada under different scenarios of intervention coverage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five-year baseline diabetes risk differed between the lowest and highest income groups by 1.76%. Assuming complete coverage across all income groups, the difference was reduced to 0.90% (144 000 cases prevented) with lifestyle interventions and 1.24% (88 100 cases prevented) with pharmacotherapy. The equity tipping point was estimated to be a coverage difference of 30% for preventive interventions (100% and 70% coverage among the highest and lowest income earners, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Disparities in diabetes risk could be measurably reduced if existing interventions were equally adopted across SEP. However, disparities in coverage could lead to increased inequity in risk. Simple modelling approaches can be used to examine the community effectiveness of individual preventive interventions and their potential to reduce (or increase) disparities. The equity tipping point can be used as a critical threshold for disparities analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":49222,"journal":{"name":"Chronic Diseases and Injuries in Canada","volume":"34 2-3","pages":"94-102"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chronic Diseases and Injuries in Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Most individual preventive therapies potentially narrow or widen health disparities depending on the difference in community effectiveness across socioeconomic position (SEP). The equity tipping point (defined as the point at which health disparities become larger) can be calculated by varying components of community effectiveness such as baseline risk of disease, intervention coverage and/or intervention efficacy across SEP.

Methods: We used a simple modelling approach to estimate the community effectiveness of diabetes prevention across SEP in Canada under different scenarios of intervention coverage.

Results: Five-year baseline diabetes risk differed between the lowest and highest income groups by 1.76%. Assuming complete coverage across all income groups, the difference was reduced to 0.90% (144 000 cases prevented) with lifestyle interventions and 1.24% (88 100 cases prevented) with pharmacotherapy. The equity tipping point was estimated to be a coverage difference of 30% for preventive interventions (100% and 70% coverage among the highest and lowest income earners, respectively).

Conclusion: Disparities in diabetes risk could be measurably reduced if existing interventions were equally adopted across SEP. However, disparities in coverage could lead to increased inequity in risk. Simple modelling approaches can be used to examine the community effectiveness of individual preventive interventions and their potential to reduce (or increase) disparities. The equity tipping point can be used as a critical threshold for disparities analyses.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
建立预防有效性模型以估计公平临界点:个体预防干预在多大范围内可以减少糖尿病风险的社会经济差异?
大多数个体预防疗法可能缩小或扩大健康差距,这取决于不同社会经济地位(SEP)的社区有效性差异。公平临界点(定义为健康差异变得更大的点)可以通过社区有效性的不同组成部分来计算,例如基线疾病风险、干预覆盖率和/或整个SEP的干预有效性。方法:我们使用简单的建模方法来估计加拿大SEP在不同干预覆盖率情景下预防糖尿病的社区有效性。结果:最低和最高收入群体的5年基线糖尿病风险差异为1.76%。假设完全覆盖所有收入群体,生活方式干预的差异减少到0.90%(14.4万例预防),药物治疗的差异减少到1.24%(88 100例预防)。据估计,公平临界点为预防性干预措施的覆盖率差异为30%(最高和最低收入者的覆盖率分别为100%和70%)。结论:如果在SEP中平等地采用现有的干预措施,糖尿病风险的差异可以明显减少。然而,覆盖范围的差异可能导致风险的不平等增加。可以使用简单的建模方法来检查个人预防性干预措施的社区有效性及其减少(或增加)差距的潜力。公平临界点可以作为差异分析的关键阈值。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Chronic Diseases and Injuries in Canada
Chronic Diseases and Injuries in Canada PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Editorial. Bicycle injuries and injury prevention. Injuries and helmet use related to non-motorized wheeled activities among pediatric patients. Intentional injury hospitalizations in geographical areas with a high percentage of Aboriginal-identity residents, 2004/2005 to 2009/2010. Modelling preventive effectiveness to estimate the equity tipping point: at what coverage can individual preventive interventions reduce socioeconomic disparities in diabetes risk? Cancer risk factors and screening in the off-reserve First Nations, Métis and non-Aboriginal populations of Ontario.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1