The Prevalence and Characteristics of Non-Transports in a Provincial Emergency Medical Services System: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) provide patients with out-of-hospital care, but not all patients are transported to the hospital. Non-transport represents an often undefined yet potentially significant risk for poor clinical outcomes. Few North American studies have quantified this risk. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence of non-transport and 48-h adverse event (composite of relapse responses that resulted in transport or death) and to identify characteristics associated with either outcome. METHODS: An analysis of pooled cross-sectional, population-based administrative data from the provincial EMS electronic charting system in 2014 was conducted. Determination of non-transport was based on recorded call outcome. The data were searched by patient identifiers to determine the 48-h adverse event rate. Paramedic-documented patient, operational, and environmental characteristics were included in the logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 74,293 emergency responses, 14,072 (18.9%) were non-transport and, of those, 798 (5.6%) resulted in a 48-h adverse event. The characteristics statistically significantly and independently associated with non-transport and 48-h adverse event were younger age (odds ratio [OR] 1.72; 99.9% confidence interval [CI] 1.46-2.02), nonspecific paramedic clinical impression (OR 5; 99.9% CI 4.48-5.57), more than 7 comorbidities (OR 0.47; 99.9% CI 0.42-0.53), and incident location (jail) (OR 2.88; 99.9% CI 2.22-3.74). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an estimate of prevalence of non-transports and 48-h adverse event in a provincial mixed rural-urban EMS system. The results of this study describe the scope of non-transport and present several characteristics associated with non-transport. Future study should examine the appropriateness of EMS responses and methods to mitigate risk of adverse event after non-transport.

Socioeconomic inequalities in psychological distress and suicidal behaviours among Indigenous peoples living off-reserve in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Indigenous peoples in Canada have high rates of psychological distress and suicide. We sought to assess the socioeconomic inequalities in psychological distress and suicidal behaviours, and the factors that explain them within Indigenous peoples living off-reserve. METHODS: Using the nationally representative 2012 Aboriginal Peoples Survey collected from Indigenous adults living off-reserve in Canada, we measured income-related inequalities in psychological distress (measured on the 10-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale) and suicidal behaviours (suicidal ideation and suicide attempt) and identified factors contributing to these inequalities using the concentration index (C) approach. RESULTS: Among 14 410 individuals representing 600 750 Indigenous adults (aged ≥ 18 yr) living off-reserve in Canada, the mean score of psychological distress was 16.1; 19.4% reported lifetime suicidal ideation and 2.2% reported a lifetime suicide attempt. Women had higher psychological distress scores (mean score 16.7 v. 15.2, p < 0.001), and prevalence of suicidal ideation (21.9% v. 16.1%, p < 0.001) and suicide attempts (2.3% v. 2.0%, p = 0.002) than men. Poorer individuals disproportionately experienced higher psychological distress (C = -0.054, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.057 to -0.050), suicidal ideation (C n = -0.218, 95% CI -0.242 to -0.194) and suicide attempts (C n = -0.327, 95% CI -0.391 to -0.263). Food insecurity and income, respectively, accounted for 40.2% and 13.7% of the psychological distress, 26.7% and 18.2% of the suicidal ideation and 13.4% and 7.8% of the suicide attempts concentrated among low-income Indigenous peoples. INTERPRETATION: Substantial income-related inequalities in psychological distress and suicidal behaviours exist among Indigenous peoples living off-reserve in Canada. Policies designed to address major contributing factors such as food insecurity and income may help reduce these inequalities.

Considering mean and inequality health outcomes together: the population health performance index.

BACKGROUND: The purpose was to develop and test a population health measure that combines mean health outcomes and inequalities into a single GDP-like metric to help policymakers measure population health performance on both dimensions in one metric. METHODS: The Population Health Performance Index is a weighted average of a mean index and an inequality index according to the user's inequality aversion. We deploy this methodology for two combinations of health outcome and disparity domain: infant mortality by race and unhealthy days by education. RESULTS: The PHPI is bounded between 0 and 1, and is comprised of a weighted average of two separate indices: a mean index and an inequality index, with 1 representing the ideal state of no ill health and no inequality and 0 representing the worst state in the U.S. PHPI values across states (neutral 50:50 weighting) vary between 0.60 (Massachusetts) to 0.17 (Delaware) for infant mortality by race and between 0.65 (North Dakota) to 0.00 (West Virginia) for unhealthy days by education. For some states, the choice of inequality aversion significantly impacts their PHPI value and state rank. CONCLUSIONS: Mean and inequality health outcomes can be combined into a single Population Health Performance Index for use by public and private policy makers, like the GDP is used as a summary metric to measure economic output. The index can allow for varying degrees of inequality aversion, an individual's or jurisdiction's value choice that can substantially impact the value of this new summary population health metric.

Associations Between Home Death and the Use and Type of Care at Home.

Despite wishes for and benefits of home deaths, a discrepancy between preferred and actual location of death persists. Provision of home care may be an effective policy response to support home deaths. Using the population-based mortality follow-back study conducted in Nova Scotia, we investigated the associations between home death and formal care at home and between home death and the type of formal care at home. We found (1) the use of formal care at home at the end of life was associated with home death and (2) the use of formal home support services at home was associated with home death among those whose symptoms were well managed.

On Effective Graphic Communication of Health Inequality: Considerations for Health Policy Researchers.

Policy Points: Effective graphs can be a powerful tool in communicating health inequality. The choice of graphs is often based on preferences and familiarity rather than science. According to the literature on graph perception, effective graphs allow human brains to decode visual cues easily. Dot charts are easier to decode than bar charts, and thus they are more effective. Dot charts are a flexible and versatile way to display information about health inequality. Consistent with the health risk communication literature, the captions accompanying health inequality graphs should provide a numerical, explicitly calculated description of health inequality, expressed in absolute and relative terms, from carefully thought-out perspectives. CONTEXT: Graphs are an essential tool for communicating health inequality, a key health policy concern. The choice of graphs is often driven by personal preferences and familiarity. Our article is aimed at health policy researchers developing health inequality graphs for policy and scientific audiences and seeks to (1) raise awareness of the effective use of graphs in communicating health inequality; (2) advocate for a particular type of graph (ie, dot charts) to depict health inequality; and (3) suggest key considerations for the captions accompanying health inequality graphs. METHODS: Using composite review methods, we selected the prevailing recommendations for improving graphs in scientific reporting. To find the origins of these recommendations, we reviewed the literature on graph perception and then applied what we learned to the context of health inequality. In addition, drawing from the numeracy literature in health risk communication, we examined numeric and verbal formats to explain health inequality graphs. FINDINGS: Many disciplines offer commonsense recommendations for visually presenting quantitative data. The literature on graph perception, which defines effective graphs as those allowing the easy decoding of visual cues in human brains, shows that with their more accurate and easier-to-decode visual cues, dot charts are more effective than bar charts. Dot charts can flexibly present a large amount of information in limited space. They also can easily accommodate typical health inequality information to describe a health variable (eg, life expectancy) by an inequality domain (eg, income) with domain groups (eg, poor and rich) in a population (eg, Canada) over time periods (eg, 2010 and 2017). The numeracy literature suggests that a health inequality graph's caption should provide a numerical, explicitly calculated description of health inequality expressed in absolute and relative terms, from carefully thought-out perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: Given the ubiquity of graphs, the health inequality field should learn from the vibrant multidisciplinary literature how to construct effective graphic communications, especially by considering to use dot charts.

Unexplained health inequality--is it unfair?

INTRODUCTION: Accurate measurement of health inequities is indispensable to track progress or to identify needs for health equity policy interventions. A key empirical task is to measure the extent to which observed inequality in health - a difference in health - is inequitable. Empirically operationalizing definitions of health inequity has generated an important question not considered in the conceptual literature on health inequity. Empirical analysis can explain only a portion of observed health inequality. This paper demonstrates that the treatment of unexplained inequality is not only a methodological but ethical question and that the answer to the ethical question - whether unexplained health inequality is unfair - determines the appropriate standardization method for health inequity analysis and can lead to potentially divergent estimates of health inequity. METHODS: We use the American sample of the 2002-03 Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health and measure health by the Health Utilities Index (HUI). We model variation in the observed HUI by demographic, socioeconomic, health behaviour, and health care variables using Ordinary Least Squares. We estimate unfair HUI by standardizing fairness, removing the fair component from the observed HUI. We consider health inequality due to factors amenable to policy intervention as unfair. We contrast estimates of inequity using two fairness-standardization methods: direct (considering unexplained inequality as ethically acceptable) and indirect (considering unexplained inequality as unfair). We use the Gini coefficient to quantify inequity. RESULTS: Our analysis shows that about 75% of the variation in the observed HUI is unexplained by the model. The direct standardization results in a smaller inequity estimate (about 60% of health inequality is inequitable) than the indirect standardization (almost all inequality is inequitable). CONCLUSIONS: The choice of the fairness-standardization method is ethical and influences the empirical health inequity results considerably. More debate and analysis is necessary regarding which treatment of the unexplained inequality has the stronger foundation in equity considerations.

A three-stage approach to measuring health inequalities and inequities.

INTRODUCTION: Measurement of health inequities is fundamental to all health equity initiatives. It is complex because it requires considerations of ethics, methods, and policy. Drawing upon the recent developments in related specialized fields, in this paper we incorporate alternative definitions of health inequity explicitly and transparently in its measurement. We propose a three-stage approach to measuring health inequities that assembles univariate health inequality, univariate health inequity, and bivariate health inequities in a systematic and comparative manner. METHODS: We illustrate the application of the three-stage approach using the Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health, measuring health by the Health Utilities Index (HUI). Univariate health inequality is the distribution of the observed HUI across individuals. Univariate health inequity is the distribution of unfair HUI--components of HUI associated with ethically unacceptable factors--across individuals. To estimate the unfair HUI, we apply two popular definitions of inequity: "equal opportunity for health" (health outcomes due to factors beyond individual control are unfair), and "policy amenability" (health outcomes due to factors amenable to policy interventions are unfair). We quantify univariate health inequality and inequity using the Gini coefficient. We assess bivariate inequities using a regression-based decomposition method. RESULTS: Our analysis reveals that, empirically, different definitions of health inequity do not yield statistically significant differences in the estimated amount of univariate inequity. This derives from the relatively small explanatory power common in regression models describing variations in health. As is typical, our model explains about 20% of the variation in the observed HUI. With regard to bivariate inequities, income and health care show strong associations with the unfair HUI. CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of health inequities is an excitingly multidisciplinary endeavour. Its development requires interdisciplinary integration of advances from relevant disciplines. The proposed three-stage approach is one such effort and stimulates cross-disciplinary dialogues, specifically, about conceptual and empirical significance of definitions of health inequities.

Inequalities in multiple health outcomes by education, sex, and race in 93 US counties: why we should measure them all.

INTRODUCTION: Regular reporting of health inequalities is essential to monitoring progress of efforts to reduce health inequalities. While reporting of population health became increasingly common, reporting of a subpopulation group breakdown of each indicator of the health of the population is rarely a standard practice. This study reports education-, sex-, and race-related inequalities in four health outcomes in each of the selected 93 counties in the United States in a systematic and comparable manner. METHODS: This study is a cross-sectional analysis of large, publicly available data, 2008, 2009, and 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) Selected Metropolitan/Micropolitan Area Risk Trends (SMART) and 2008, 2009, and 2010 United States Birth Records from the National Vital Statistics System. The study population is American adults older than 25 years of age residing in the selected 93 counties, representing about 30% of the US population, roughly equally covering all geographic regions of the country. Main outcome measures are: (1) Attribute (group characteristic)-specific inequality: education-, sex-, or race-specific inequality in each of the four health outcomes (poor or fair health, poor physical health days, poor mental health days, and low birthweight) in each county; (2) Overall inequality: the average of these three attribute-specific inequalities for each health outcome in each county; and (3) Summary inequality in total morbidity: the weighted average of the overall inequalities across the four health outcomes in each county. RESULTS: The range of inequality across the counties differed considerably by health outcome; inequality in poor or fair health had the widest range and the highest median among inequalities in all health outcomes. In more than 70% of the counties, education-specific inequality was the largest in all health outcomes except for low birthweight. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to extend population health reporting to include reporting of a subpopulation group breakdown of each indicator of the health of the population at a small jurisdictional level using publicly available data. No single group characteristic or health outcome represents the whole picture of health inequalities in a population. Examining multiple group characteristics and outcomes in a comparable manner is essential in reporting health inequalities.

Bereaved family member perceptions of patient-focused family-centred care during the last 30 days of life using a mortality follow-back survey: does location matter?

BACKGROUND: Improving end-of-life care is an important international issue. Recently Nova Scotia researchers conducted a mortality follow-back survey to provide a population-based description of care provided to adults during their last 30 days of life as perceived by knowledgeable bereaved family members. Here we describe the relationship between the location where the decedent received the majority of care during their last 30 days and the informant's perception of the extent of unmet need, as defined by multiple domains of patient-focused, family-centred care. METHOD: Death certificate identified informants (next-of-kin) of eligible adults who died between June 2009 and May 2011, in Nova Scotia, Canada were invited to participate in a telephone interview based on the After-Death Bereaved Family Member Interview. Whether or not the informant expressed unmet need or concerns for six patient-focused, family-centred care domains were assessed in relation to the location where the majority of care occurred during the decedent's last 30 days. RESULTS: 1358 informants took part (25% response rate). Results of 1316 eligible interviews indicated home (39%) was the most common location of care, followed by long-term care (29%), hospital (23%) and hospital-based palliative-care units (9%). Unmet need ranged from 5.6% for dyspnea help to 66% for the emotional and spiritual needs of the family. Although the mean score for overall satisfaction was high (mean = 8.7 in 1-10 scale; SD 1.8), 57% were not completely satisfied. Compared to home, adjusted results indicated greater dissatisfaction with overall care and greater communication concerns in the hospital. Greater unmet need occurred at home for dyspnea. Less overall dissatisfaction and unmet need were expressed about care provided in long-term care facilities and hospital-based palliative-care units. CONCLUSION: Bereaved informants were generally highly satisfied with the decedent's care during their last 30 days but variations were evident. Overall, no one location stood out as exceptionally different in terms of perceived unmet need within each of the patient-focused, family-centred care domains. Communication in various forms and family emotional and spiritual support were consistently viewed as lacking in all locations and identified as targeted areas for impacting quality care at end of life.

Summarizing social disparities in health.

CONTEXT: Reporting on health disparities is fundamental for meeting the goal of reducing health disparities. One often overlooked challenge is determining the best way to report those disparities associated with multiple attributes such as income, education, sex, and race/ethnicity. This article proposes an analytical approach to summarizing social disparities in health, and we demonstrate its empirical application by comparing the degrees and patterns of health disparities in all fifty states and the District of Columbia (DC). METHODS: We used the 2009 American Community Survey, and our measure of health was functional limitation. For each state and DC, we calculated the overall disparity and attribute-specific disparities for income, education, sex, and race/ethnicity in functional limitation. Along with the state rankings of these health disparities, we developed health disparity profiles according to the attribute making the largest contribution to overall disparity in each state. FINDINGS: Our results show a general lack of consistency in the rankings of overall and attribute-specific disparities in functional limitation across the states. Wyoming has the smallest overall disparity and West Virginia the largest. In each of the four attribute-specific health disparity rankings, however, most of the best- and worst-performing states in regard to overall health disparity are not consistently good or bad. Our analysis suggests the following three disparity profiles across states: (1) the largest contribution from race/ethnicity (thirty-four states), (2) roughly equal contributions of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic factor(s) (ten states), and (3) the largest contribution from socioeconomic factor(s) (seven states). CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed approach offers policy-relevant health disparity information in a comparable and interpretable manner, and currently publicly available data support its application. We hope this approach will spark discussion regarding how best to systematically track health disparities across communities or within a community over time in relation to the health disparity goal of Healthy People 2020.

Comparison of body pressure distribution in healthy subjects between bubble wrap and an emergency mattress laid on a cardboard bed: a randomized controlled crossover trial.

Background: It has been pointed out that the poor environment of evacuation shelters causes health problems and disaster-related deaths among evacuees, and we are concerned that their environment will deteriorate, particularly during a large-scale disaster due to a shortage of daily necessities. In Japan, evacuees usually slept on floors with futons until the Great East Japan Earthquake, but cardboard beds were installed in evacuation shelters. Previous studies have suggested that cardboard beds can reduce cold air transmission from the floor. We have reported that a cardboard bed can have a low-contact pressure dispersion capacity and cannot reduce musculoskeletal strain, unlike a futon or mattress. In the Great East Japan Earthquake, 33% of disaster-related deaths were reported to have been caused by physical or mental fatigue due to living in evacuation shelters. When a large-scale disaster such as the Nankai Trough Earthquake generates huge numbers of evacuees, the supply of mattresses for evacuees will be very difficult. Therefore, we considered potential alternatives that could be produced in large quantities over a short period. Bubble wrap, with very lightweight and waterproofing, could be a good candidate for mattress replacement. This study aimed to investigate the improvement in body pressure distribution and pressure-sensing area when using bubble wrap. Methods: Twenty-seven healthy subjects allocated to sequences A and B with different intervention order were laid in supine and lateral positions on a cardboard bed without a mattress, bubble wrap, or air mattress: the mattress-body contact pressure and contour areas were measured, and subjective firmness and comfort during these conditions were also investigated using the visual analog scale (VAS). Acquired data were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model and Bonferroni's post-hoc test, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mattress-body contact pressure and contour area showed significant differences with and without air mattresses. With the air mattresses, the pressure in the supine position decreased by 34%, and that in the lateral position decreased by 13%. However, the four-fold bubble wrap did not improve the mattress-body contact pressure and contour area; the change ratios were within 5% compared to the cardboard bed. However, there were significant differences in subjective firmness and comfort using the VAS among all experimental positions. Conclusion: Our study showed that bubble wrap could not significantly improve body pressure concentration and may not be a satisfactory substitute for air mattresses. Because of the improvement in subjective firmness and comfort with the bubble wrap, using it for an extended period may affect the incidence of back pain in evacuees. Finally, we hypothesize that the body pressure dispersion of the bubble wrap may be improved by changing the air-filling rate and the size of the air bubbles.

Income-Related Inequities in Primary and Specialist Care Among First Nations Peoples Living Off-Reserve in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Improving equity in healthcare is a primary goal of health policy in Canada. Although the investigation of equity in healthcare utilization is common in the general population, little research has been conducted to assess equity in healthcare utilization within First Nations peoples living in Canada. OBJECTIVE: To examine income-related inequities in primary care (family doctor/general practitioner and nurse practitioner care) and specialist care within status and non-status First Nations adults living off-reserve. METHODS: Using the 2017 Aboriginal Peoples Survey (APS), a nationally representative survey of Indigenous peoples living off-reserve in Canada, we analyzed income-related inequities in healthcare among Indigenous adults (>18 years) who self-identified as a member of any First Nations group in Canada. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the utilization of primary and specialist care. The Horizontal Inequity index (HI), which measures unequal healthcare use by income for equal need, was used to quantify and decompose income-related inequities for primary and specialist care for status and non-status, and total First Nations groups. RESULTS: The regression results revealed higher primary and specialist care use among females, high socioeconomic status (high income and more educated) and status First Nations peoples in Canada. The positive values of the HI suggested a higher concentration of primary care and specialist care utilization among higher income First Nations peoples after adjusting for healthcare need. These pro-rich inequities persisted for the total First Nations populations, and for those in each status group individually. The decomposition results suggested observed inequities in both primary and specialist care among First Nations peoples can be predominantly attributed to the unequal distribution of education and income. CONCLUSION: Although primary and specialist services in Canada are free at the point of the provision, we found pro-rich inequities in healthcare use among First Nations adults living off-reserve in Canada. These results warrant policies and initiatives to address barriers to healthcare use within and outside health system among low-income First Nations peoples living off-reserve.

Trajectories of the socioeconomic gradient of mental health: Results from the CLSA COVID-19 Questionnaire Study.

As the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic prolongs, documenting trajectories of the socioeconomic gradient of mental health is important. We describe changes in the prevalence and absolute and relative income-related inequalities of mental health between April and December 2020 in Canada. We used data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) COVID-19 Questionnaire Study and the pre-pandemic CLSA Follow-up 1. We estimated the prevalence proportion, the concentration index (relative inequality), and the generalized concentration index (absolute inequality) for anxiety and self-reported feeling generally unwell at multiple points in April-December 2020, overall, by sex and age group, by region, and among those who reported poor or fair overall health and mental health pre-pandemic. Overall, the prevalence of anxiety remained unchanged (22.45 to 22.10%, p = 0.231), but self-reported feeling generally unwell decreased (9.83 to 5.94%, p = 0.004). Relative and absolute income-related inequalities were unchanged for both anxiety and self-reported feeling generally unwell, with exceptions of an increased concentration of self-reported feeling generally unwell among the poor, measured by the concentration index, overall (-0.054 to -0.115, p = 0.004) and in Ontario (-0.035 to -0.123, p = 0.047) and British Columbia (-0.055 to -0.141, p = 0.044). The COVID-19 pandemic appeared to neither exacerbate nor ameliorate existing income-related inequalities in mental health among older adults in Canada between April and December 2020. Continued monitoring of inequalities is necessary.

A team approach to improving colorectal cancer services using administrative health data.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in Canada and accounts for 11.9% of all cancer-related mortality. Fortunately, previous studies have provided evidence of improved outcomes from access to timely and appropriate health services along the disease trajectory in CRC. As a result, the CIHR/CCNS Team in Access to Colorectal Cancer Services in Nova Scotia (Team ACCESS) was created to build colorectal cancer (CRC) research capacity in Nova Scotia (NS) and to study access to and quality of CRC services along the entire continuum of cancer care. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this paper are to: 1) provide a detailed description of the methodologies employed across the various studies being conducted by Team ACCESS; 2) demonstrate how administrative health data can be used to evaluate access and quality in CRC services; and 3) provide an example of an interdisciplinary team approach to addressing health service delivery issues. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with CRC in NS between 2001 and 2005 were identified through the Nova Scotia Cancer Registry (NSCR) and staged using the Collaborative Stage Data Collection System. Using administrative databases that were linked at the patient level, Team ACCESS created a retrospective longitudinal cohort with comprehensive demographic, clinical, and healthcare utilization data. These data were used to examine access to and quality of CRC services in NS, as well as factors affecting access to and quality of care, at various transition points along the continuum of care. Team ACCESS has also implemented integrated knowledge translation strategies targeting policy- and decision- makers. DISCUSSION: The development of Team ACCESS represents a unique approach to CRC research. We anticipate that the skills, tools, and knowledge generated from our work will also advance the study of other cancer disease sites in NS. Given the increasing prevalence of cancer, and with national and provincial funding agencies promoting collaborative research through increased funding for research team development, the work carried out by Team ACCESS is important in the Canadian context and exemplifies how a team approach is essential to comprehensively addressing issues surrounding not only cancer, but other chronic diseases in Canada.

Inequalities in end-of-life care for colorectal cancer patients in Nova Scotia, Canada.

Access to high-quality end-of-life (EOL) care is critical for all those with incurable cancer. The objective of this study was to examine inequalities in access to, and quality of, EOL care by assessing registration in a palliative care program, emergency room visits in the last 30 days of life, and location of death among individuals who died of colorectal cancer in Nova Scotia, Canada, between 2001 and 2008. We used population-based linked administrative data and performed multivariate logistic regression models to assess the association between socio-economic, geographic, and demographic factors and outcomes related to access to, and quality of, EOL care (n=1201). This study demonstrates that although access to, and quality of, EOL care appears to have improved, there remain significant inequalities throughout the population. Of primary concern is the variation in access to, and quality of, EOL care based on geographic location of residence and patient age.

Personal Responsibility for Health: Exploring Together with Lay Persons.

Emerging parallel to long-standing, academic and policy inquiries on personal responsibility for health is the empirical assessment of lay persons' views. Yet, previous studies rarely explored personal responsibility for health among lay persons as dynamic societal values. We sought to explore lay persons' views on personal responsibility for health using the Fairness Dialogues, a method for lay persons to deliberate equity issues in health and health care through a small group dialogue using a hypothetical scenario. We conducted two 2-h Fairness Dialogues sessions (n = 15 in total) in Nova Scotia, Canada. We analyzed data using thematic analysis. Our analysis showed that personal choice played an important role in participants' thinking about health. Underlying the concept of personal choice was considerations of freedom and societal debt. In participants' minds, personal and social responsibilities co-existed and they were unwilling to determine health care priority based on personal responsibility. The Fairness Dialogues is a promising deliberative method to explore lay persons' views as dynamic values to be developed through group dialogues as opposed to static, already-formed values waiting to be elicited.

Inequity in access to cancer care: a review of the Canadian literature.

Despite the policy and research attention on ensuring equitable access--equal access for equal need--to health care, research continues to identify inequities in access to cancer services. We conducted a literature review to identify the current state of knowledge about inequity in access to cancer health services in Canada in terms of the continuum of care, disease sites, and dimensions of inequity (e.g., income). We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase for studies published between 1990 and 2009. We retrieved 51 studies, which examine inequity in access to cancer services from screening to end-of-life care, for multiple cancer types, and a variety of socioeconomic, geographic, and demographic factors that may cause concern for inequity in Canada. This review demonstrates that income has the most consistent influence on inequity in access to screening, while age and geography are most influential for treatment services and end-of-life care, even after adjusting for patient need. Our review also reports on methods used in the literature and new techniques to explore. Equitable access to cancer care is vitally important in all health systems. Obtaining information on the current status of inequities in access to cancer care is a critical first step toward action.

Understanding different methodological approaches to measuring inequity in health care.

The objectives of this study were to classify different methodological approaches to measuring inequity in health care, identify the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, and suggest directions for future improvement of each approach. The authors classified three approaches to measuring inequity in health care according to: (1) collective expert judgments (clinical standard approach), (2) average health care use based on need (population standard approach), and (3) assessment of health care users or providers (direct approach). The clinical standard approach has strong face validity and immediate policy implication, while lacking global policy implications. The population standard approach offers a global picture of inequity but has weak face validity. The direct approach can reveal private information of health care users and offer opportunity for managing public expectation. Strengths and limitations of these approaches are complementary, suggesting directions for future improvements of each approach. This study will help researchers make a well-informed choice of measurement approach and assist policymakers in resolving some of the problems caused by the diverse findings of studies, partly due to the measurement approaches taken.