2008
DOI: 10.1080/02841860801888773
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cancer risk by education in Iceland; a census-based cohort study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

3
39
0
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
3
39
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…It has been shown that inequalities in mortality from lung cancer rose in many European countries between 1990 and 2000, due to a significant decrease in highly educated people contrasting with an increase in lowly educated ones [36]. In an Icelandic study, the risk of lung cancer for men with academic education was 63% of that of men with basic education [37]. In the Netherlands, the GLOBE study showed that the relative risk for lung cancer for low versus high education was 2.7 (95% CI: 1.3-5.3); adjustment for smoking, alcohol intake and physical activity decreased the risk to 1.6 (95% CI: 0.8-3.3) [38], showing that differences might be at least partly explained by behavioural factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been shown that inequalities in mortality from lung cancer rose in many European countries between 1990 and 2000, due to a significant decrease in highly educated people contrasting with an increase in lowly educated ones [36]. In an Icelandic study, the risk of lung cancer for men with academic education was 63% of that of men with basic education [37]. In the Netherlands, the GLOBE study showed that the relative risk for lung cancer for low versus high education was 2.7 (95% CI: 1.3-5.3); adjustment for smoking, alcohol intake and physical activity decreased the risk to 1.6 (95% CI: 0.8-3.3) [38], showing that differences might be at least partly explained by behavioural factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast to the theoretical papers, the papers reporting empirical studies [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] did not have the same clear focus on equity in health. Two papers [25,27] neither mentioned nor dealt with equity aspects and thus appeared to have ended up in the equity folder by chance.…”
Section: Qualitative Analysis -Empirical Papersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two papers [25,27] neither mentioned nor dealt with equity aspects and thus appeared to have ended up in the equity folder by chance. Other papers mentioned equity but did not really deal with the concept, while some did not mention equity even though the contents clearly targeted equity aspects.…”
Section: Qualitative Analysis -Empirical Papersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some published studies have documented a positive relation between high socioeconomic status (SES) and breast cancer risk [10][11][12][13]. While overall there is an inverse association between SES and cancer risk and almost all cancer incidences, in particular of the lung, stomach, pharynx, esophagus, and cervical uteri, are higher when SES is lower [10,[13][14][15], a positive association was found for cancers of colon, prostate, breast, and skin melanoma [13,14]. For example, in an Italian study, women with lower educational levels were at lower risk of breast cancer, melanoma, and ovarian cancers but had a higher risk of stomach, liver, and cervical cancers [16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%