Socioeconomic determinants of cancer screening utilisation in Latin America: A systematic review

Autoři: Bernardo Nuche-Berenguer aff001;  Dikaios Sakellariou aff002
Působiště autorů: Former student, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom aff001;  School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(11)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225667



Cancer incidence and mortality in Latin America are rising. While effective cancer screening services, accessible to the whole population and enabling early cancer detection are needed, existing research shows the existence of disparities in screening uptake in the region.


We conducted a systematic review to investigate the socioeconomic determinants for the disparities in the use of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening services in Latin America.


We searched for studies reporting on socioeconomic determinants impacting on access to breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening, published from 2009 through 2018. The studies that qualified for inclusion contained original analyses on utilisation of breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening across socioeconomic levels in Latin America. For each study, paired reviewers performed a quality analysis followed by detailed review and data extraction.


Twenty-four articles that met the eligibility criteria and were of sufficient quality were included in this review. Thirteen of the included articles were written in English, eight in Portuguese and three in Spanish, and they reported on the use of breast or cervical cancer screening. No studies were found on the socioeconomic determinants regarding the utilisation of colorectal cancer screening in Latin America. Low income, low education level, lack of health insurance and single marital status were all found to be determinants of underuse of breast and cervical cancer screening services.


Cancer screening programs in the region must prioritize reaching those populations that underuse cancer screening services to ensure equitable access to preventive services. It is important to develop national screening programmes that are accessible to all (including uninsured people) through, for example, the use of mobile units for mammography and self-screening methods.

Klíčová slova:

Cancer screening – Cervical cancer – Colorectal cancer – Educational attainment – Health insurance – Health screening – Mammography – Socioeconomic aspects of health


1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin, 2018;68(6):394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492 30207593

2. World Health Organisation. Cancer Control: Knowledge into Action: WHO Guide for Effective Programmes.Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation; 2006.

3. Goss PE, Lee BL, Badovinac-Crnjevic T, Strasser-Weippl K, Chavarri-Guerra Y, St Louis J, et al. Planning cancer control in Latin America and the Caribbean. Lancet Oncol, 2013. 14(5): 391–436. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70048-2 23628188

4. Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, Dewar JA, Thompson SG, Wilcox M. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer, 2013. 108(11): 2205–40. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.177 23744281

5. Paci E. Summary of the evidence of breast cancer service screening outcomes in Europe and first estimate of the benefit and harm balance sheet. J Med Screen, 2012. 19 Suppl 1: 5–13.

6. Peirson L, Fitzpatrick-Lewis D, Ciliska D, Warren R. Screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev, 2013. 2: 35. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-35 23706117

7. Hewitson P, Glasziou PP, Irwig L, Towler B, Watson E. Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2007(1): CD001216. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001216.pub2 17253456

8. Holme Ø, Bretthauer M, Fretheim A, Odgaard‐Jensen J, Hoff G. Flexible sigmoidoscopy versus faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2013(9): CD009259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009259.pub2 24085634

9. Pan American Health Organization. Profile of Capacity and Response to Noncommunicable Diseases and Their Risk factors in the region of the Americas. Washington, D.C: Pan American Health Organization; 2017.

10. Arrossi S, Paolino M, and Sankaranarayanan R. Challenges faced by cervical cancer prevention programs in developing countries: a situational analysis of program organization in Argentina. Rev Panam Salud Publica, 2010. 28(4): 249–57. doi: 10.1590/s1020-49892010001000003 21152712

11. Strasser-Weippl K, Chavarri-Guerra Y, Villarreal-Garza C, Bychkovsky BL, Debiasi M, Liedke PE, et al. Progress and remaining challenges for cancer control in Latin America and the Caribbean. Lancet Oncol, 2015. 16(14): 1405–38. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00218-1 26522157

12. Veugelers PJ, Yip AM. Socioeconomic disparities in health care use: Does universal coverage reduce inequalities in health? J Epidemiol Community Health, 2003. 57(6): 424–8. doi: 10.1136/jech.57.6.424 12775787

13. Gornick ME, Eggers PW, Riley GF. Associations of race, education, and patterns of preventive service use with stage of cancer at time of diagnosis. Health Serv Res, 2004. 39(5): 1403–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00296.x 15333115

14. Martins L.L, Valente JG, Thuler LCS. Factors related to inadequate cervical cancer screening in two Brazilian state capitals. Revista de Saude Publica, 2009. 43(2): 318–325. doi: 10.1590/s0034-89102009000200013 19287874

15. McCarthy SH, Walmer KA, Boggan JC, Gichane MW, Calo WA, Beauvais HA, et al. Awareness of Cervical Cancer Causes and Predeterminants of Likelihood to Screen among Women in Haiti. Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease, 2017. 21(1): 37–41. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000281 27906806

16. Gasperin SI, Boing AF, Kupek E. Cervical cancer screening coverage and associated factors in a city in southern Brazil: a population-based study. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 2011. 27(7): 1312–1322. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2011000700007 21808816

17. Cesar JA, Santos GB, Sutil AT, Cunha CF, Dumith SD. Pap smears among pregnant women in Southern Brazil: a representative cross-sectional survey. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2012. 34(11): 518–523. doi: 10.1590/s0100-72032012001100007 23288263

18. Martinez-Mesa J, Werutsky G, Campani RB, Wehrmeister FC, Barrios CH. Inequalities in Pap smear screening for cervical cancer in Brazil. Preventive Medicine, 2013. 57(4): 366–371. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.06.026 23827721

19. Schneider IJ, Giehl MW, Boing AF, d’Orsi E. Mammogram screening for breast cancer and associated factors in the South of Brazil: a based-population survey. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 2014. 30(9): 1987–1997. doi: 10.1590/0102-311x00162313 25317527

20. Bermedo-Carrasco S, Peña-Sánchez JN, Lepnurm R, Szafron M, Waldner C. Inequities in cervical cancer screening among Colombian women: A multilevel analysis of a nationwide survey. Cancer Epidemiology, 2015. 39(2): 229–236. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2015.01.011 25707752

21. BarrionuevoRosas L, Palencia L, Borrell C, How does type of health insurance affect receipt of Pap testing in Peru? [Spanish]. Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica/Pan American Journal of Public Health, 2013. 34(6): 393–400. 24569967

22. Soneji S, Fukui N. Socioeconomic determinants of cervical cancer screening in Latin America. Rev Panam Salud Publica, 2013. 33(3): 174–82. doi: 10.1590/s1020-49892013000300003 23698136

23. Souza CI, Araújo DS, Teles DA, Carvalho SG, Cavalcante KW, Rabelo WL, et al. Factors related to non-adherence to mammography in a city of the Brazilian Amazonian area: A population-based study. Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira, 2017. 63(1): 35–42. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.63.01.35 28225871

24. Brenes Camacho, RoseroBixby L. Differentials by socioeconomic status and institutional characteristics in preventive service utilization by older persons in costa rica. Journal of aging and health, 2009. 21(5): 730–758. doi: 10.1177/0898264309338299 19584413

25. Ortiz AP, Hebl S, Serrano R, Fernandez ME, Suárez E, Tortolero-Luna G. Factors associated with cervical cancer screening in Puerto Rico. Preventing Chronic Disease, 2010. 7(3): A58. 20394697

26. Oliveira MV, Guimaraes MDC, Franca EB. Factors associated with failure to take a Pap smear test among Quilombola women. Ciencia & Saude Coletiva, 2014. 19(11): 4535–4544

27. Melo EC, de Oliveira EX, Chor D, Carvalho MS, Pinheiro RS. Inequalities in socioeconomic status and race and the odds of undergoing a mammogram in Brazil. International Journal for Equity in Health, 2016. 15(1): 144. doi: 10.1186/s12939-016-0435-4 27628786

28. Matos JC, Pelloso SM, Carvalho MD. Factors associated with secondary breast cancer prevention in Maringa, Parana State, Brazil. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 2011. 27(5): 888–898. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2011000500007 21655840

29. Brischiliari SC, Dell'Agnolo CM, Gil LM, Romeiro TC, Gravena ÂA, Carvalho MD, et al. Factors associated with lack of Pap smear screening in a group of postmenopausal Brazilian women. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 2012. 28(10): 1976–1984. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2012001000015 23090176

30. Correa MD, Silveira DS, Siqueira FV, Facchini LA, Piccini RX, Thumé E, et al. Pap test coverage and adequacy in the South and Northeast of Brazil. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 2012. 28(12): 2257–2266. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2012001400005 23288059

31. FontGonzalez A, Pineros M, Vries E. Self-reported early detection activities for breast cancer in Colombia in 2010: impact of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. Salud Publica de Mexico, 2013. 55(4): 368–378. doi: 10.21149/spm.v55i4.7220 24165712

32. LSHTM, PHM 203 Economic Analysis for Health Policy Module Lectures, Session 5, Tools for Equity Analysis. Online course materials. London:London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine;2017.

33. De Maio FG, Linetzky B, Ferrante D. Changes in the social gradients for Pap smears and mammograms in Argentina: evidence from the 2005 and 2009 National Risk Factor Surveys. Public Health, 2012. 126(10): 821–6. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2012.05.011 23083845

34. Agudelo Botero M. Sociodemographic determinants of access to breast cancer screening in Mexico: a review of national surveys. Salud Colectiva, 2013. 9(1): 79–90. doi: 10.1590/S1851-82652013000100007 23680751

35. Novaes C, Mattos IE. Prevalence of non-utilization of mammography and associated factors in elderly women. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 2009. 25(Suppl 2): S310–20.

36. Sakellariou D, Rotarou ES. Utilisation of cancer screening services by disabled women in Chile. PLoS ONE, 2017. 12(5) (pagination):: e0176270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176270 28459874

37. Albuquerque KM, Frias PG, Andrade CL, Aquino EM, Menezes G, Szwarcwald CL. Pap smear coverage and factors associated with non-participation in cervical cancer screening: an analysis of the Cervical Cancer Prevention Program in Pernambuco State, Brazil. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 2009. 25(Suppl 2): S301–9.

38. Price J, Asgary R. Women's health disparities in Honduras: Indicators and determinants. Journal of Women's Health, 2011. 20(12): 1931–1937. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2010.2615 22107148

39. Senicato C, Barros MB. Social inequality in health among women in Campinas, São Paulo State, Brazil. Cadernos de Saude Publica. 2012;28:1903–14. 40. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x2012001000009 23090170

40. Lages RB, Oliveira GD, Simeão Filho VM, Nogueira FM, Teles JB, Vieira SC. Inequalities associated with lack of mammography in Teresina-Piaui-Brazil, 2010–2011. Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, 2012. 15(4): 737–747. doi: 10.1590/s1415-790x2012000400006 23515770

41. Sierra MS, Soerjomataram I, Antoni S, Laversanne M, Piñeros M, de Vries E, et al. Cancer patterns and trends in Central and South America. Cancer Epidemiol, 2016. 44 Suppl 1: S23–S42.

42. Viniegra M, Paolino M, Arrossi S. Cáncer de mama en Argentina: organización, cobertura y calidad de las acciones de prevención y control. Informe final julio 2010: diagnóstico de situación del Programa Nacional y Programas Provinciales. 2010.

43. Arrossi S, Paolino M.Proyecto para el mejoramiento del Programa Nacional de Prevención de Cáncer de Cuello Uterino en Argentina: Diagnóstico de situación del Programa Nacional de Prevención de Cáncer de Cuello de Útero, y Programas Provinciales. Buenos Aires: Organización Panamericana de la Salud; 2008. (Informe Técnico No. 64).

44. Gualdrini U, Iummato L. Cáncer colorectal en la Argentina. Organización, cobertura y calidad de las acciones de prevención y control. Propuesta del Programa de prevención y detección temprana, y acciones para su implementación. 2011.

45. Pereira-Scalabrin A. Almonte M, Dos-Santos-Silva I. Country-level correlates of cervical cancer mortality in Latin America and the Caribbean. Salud Publica Mex, 2013. 55(1): 5–15. doi: 10.1590/s0036-36342013000100004 23370254

46. McKinnon B, Harper S, Moore S. Decomposing income-related inequality in cervical screening in 67 countries. Int J Public Health, 2011. 56(2): 139–52. doi: 10.1007/s00038-010-0224-6 21327854

47. Arrossi S, Matos E, Zengarini N, Roth B, Sankaranayananan R, Parkin M. The socio-economic impact of cervical cancer on patients and their families in Argentina, and its influence on radiotherapy compliance; results from a cross-sectional study. Gynecol Oncol, 2007. 105(2): 335–40. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.12.010 17258801

48. Gonzaga CM, Freitas-Junior R, Curado MP, Sousa AL, Souza-Neto JA, Souza MR. Temporal trends in female breast cancer mortality in Brazil and correlations with social inequalities: ecological time-series study. BMC Public Health, 2015. 15: 96. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1445-7 25886146

49. Girianelli VR, Gamarra CJ, Azevedo e Silva G. Disparities in cervical and breast cancer mortality in Brazil. Rev Saude Publica, 2014. 48(3): 459–67. doi: 10.1590/S0034-8910.2014048005214 25119941

50. Figueiredo F, Adami F. Income Inequality and Mortality Owing to Breast Cancer: Evidence From Brazil. Clin Breast Cancer, 2018. 18(4): e651–e658. doi: 10.1016/j.clbc.2017.11.005 29239835

51. Tumas N, Pou S, Díaz M. Inequities in health: sociodemographic and spatial analysis of breast cancer in women from Córdoba, Argentina. Gac Sanit, 2017. 31(5): 396–403. doi: 10.1016/j.gaceta.2016.12.011 28325664

52. Palazzo A, Perinetti A, Vacchino M. Estadio clínico del cáncer de mama y nivel socioeconómico en el partido de General Pueyrredón, Argentina, 2013. Rev Argent Salud Pública, 2016. 7(27): 16–20.

53. Pruitt SL, Shim MJ, Mullen PD, Vernon SW, Amick BC. Association of area socioeconomic status and breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2009. 18(10): 2579–99. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0135 19815634

54. Bigby J, Holmes MD. Disparities across the breast cancer continuum. Cancer Causes Control, 2005. 16(1): 35–44. doi: 10.1007/s10552-004-1263-1 15750856

55. Fukuda Y, Nakamura K, Takano T. Reduced likelihood of cancer screening among women in urban areas and with low socio-economic status: a multilevel analysis in Japan. Public Health, 2005. 119(10): 875–84. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2005.03.013 16054179

56. Akinyemiju T, Ogunsina K, Sakhuja S, Ogbhodo V, Braithwaite D. Life-course socioeconomic status and breast and cervical cancer screening: Analysis of the WHO's Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE). BMJ Open, 2016. 6(11): e012753. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012753 27881528

57. Chidyaonga-Maseko F, Chirwa ML, Muula AS. Underutilization of cervical cancer prevention services in low and middle income countries: a review of contributing factors. Pan Afr Med J, 2015. 21: 231. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2015.21.231.6350 26523173

58. Yerramilli P, Dugee O, Enkhtuya P, Knaul FM, Demaio AR. Exploring Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Related to Breast and Cervical Cancers in Mongolia: A National Population-Based Survey. Oncologist, 2015. 20(11): 1266–73. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0119 26417038

59. Compaore S, Ouedraogo CM, Koanda S, Haynatzki G, Chamberlain RM, Soliman AS. Barriers to Cervical Cancer Screening in Burkina Faso: Needs for Patient and Professional Education. J Cancer Educ, 2016. 31(4): 760–766. doi: 10.1007/s13187-015-0898-9 26336956

60. Borges ZD, Wehrmeister FC, Gomes AP, Gonçalves H. Clinical breast examination and mammography: inequalities in Southern and Northeast Brazilian regions. Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, 2016. 19(1): 1–13. doi: 10.1590/1980-5497201600010001 27167644

61. Laurell AS, Giovanella L. Health Policies and Systems in Latin America. Oxford Research Encyclopedia, Global Public Health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019.

62. Basu P, Ponti A, Anttila A, Ronco G, Senore C, Vale DB, et al. Status of implementation and organization of cancer screening in The European Union Member States-Summary results from the second European screening report. Int J Cancer, 2018. 142(1): 44–56. doi: 10.1002/ijc.31043 28940326

63. Durand M., Chantler T. Principles of social research,. London: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; 2014.

64. Smith S., Sinclair D., Raine R., Reeves B. Health care evaluation; Understanding public health. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press; 2005.

65. Salvia A, Donza E. Problemas de medición y sesgos de estimación derivados de la no respuestas a la preguntas de ingresos en la EPH (1990–1998). Rev Estudios del Trabajo, N°. 18, AST; 1999.

66. Camelo H, Subdeclaración de ingresos medios en las encuestas de hogares, según quintiles de hogares y Fuentes de ingreso. 2do Taller Regional Medición de del ingreso en las encuestas de hogares. MECOVI: Buenos Aires; 1998.

67. Beccaria L, Minujin A. Sobre la medición de la pobreza: enseñanzas a partir de la experiencia argentina. UNICEF: Buenos Aires; 1991.

68. Llach J, Montoya S. En pos de la equidad. La pobreza y la distribución del ingreso en el Área Metropolitana de Buenos Aires: diagnóstico y alternativas de políticas. Buenos Aires: IERAL; 1999.

69. Mancero X. Escalas de equivalencia: reseña de conceptos y métodos. Santiago de Chile: CEPAL; 2001.

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 11