Socioeconomic Status in Relation to the Risk of Ovarian Cancer in African-American Women: A Population-Based Case-Control Study.

We investigated the association between socioeconomic status and ovarian cancer in African-American women. We used a population-based case-control study design that included case patients with incident ovarian cancer (n = 513) and age- and area-matched control participants (n = 721) from 10 states who were recruited into the African American Cancer Epidemiology Study from December 2010 through December 2014. Questionnaires were administered via telephone, and study participants responded to questions about several characteristics, including years of education, family annual income, and risk factors for ovarian cancer. After adjustment for established ovarian cancer risk factors, women with a college degree or more education had an odds ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51, 0.99) when compared with those with a high school diploma or less (P for trend = 0.02); women with family annual incomes of $75,000 or more had an odds ratio of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.47, 1.16) when compared with those with incomes less than $10,000 (P for trend = 0.055). When these variables were dichotomized, compared with women with a high school diploma or less, women with more education had an adjusted odds ratio of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.93), and compared with women with an income less than $25,000, women with higher incomes had an adjusted odds ratio of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.12). These findings suggest that ovarian cancer risk may be inversely associated with socioeconomic status among African-American women and highlight the need for additional evidence to more thoroughly characterize the association between socioeconomic status and ovarian cancer.

Traditional foods and practices of Spanish-speaking Latina mothers influence the home food environment: implications for future interventions.

This study aimed to obtain in-depth information from low-income, Spanish-speaking Latino families with young children to guide the development of culturally appropriate nutrition interventions. Focus groups were used to assess parent's knowledge about healthful eating, the home food environment, perceived influences on children's eating habits, food purchasing practices, and commonly used strategies to promote healthful eating among their children. Thirty-four Latino parents (33 women; 27 born in Mexico; 21 food-insecure) of preschool-aged children participated in four focus group discussions conducted in Spanish by a trained moderator. The focus groups were audiotaped, transcribed, translated, and coded by independent raters. Results suggest that in general, parents were very knowledgeable about healthful eating and cited both parents and school as significant factors influencing children's eating habits; at home, most families had more traditional Mexican foods available than American foods; cost and familiarity with foods were the most influential factors affecting food purchasing; many parents had rules regarding sugar intake; and parents cited role modeling, reinforcement, and creative food preparation as ways to encourage children's healthful eating habits. Finally, parents generated ideas on how to best assist Latino families through interventions. Parents indicated that future interventions should be community based and teach skills to purchase and prepare meals that include low-cost and traditional Mexican ingredients, using hands-on activities. In addition, interventions could encourage and reinforce healthy food-related practices that Latino families bring from their native countries.

Dyadic efficacy for smoking cessation: preliminary assessment of a new instrument.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking cessation research has demonstrated a link between social support and quitting, but interventions designed to enhance partner support have often failed. We adapted and tested a measure of dyadic efficacy to assess smokers' confidence in their abilities to work together as a team with their partners to quit smoking and cope with quitting challenges. Our goal was to establish the psychometric properties of the dyadic efficacy instrument, including its associations with cessation outcomes. METHODS: We recruited partnered smokers who called the American Cancer Society's Quitline and administered telephone interviews (N = 634, 59% female, average age = 40 years). Interviews included 8 dyadic efficacy items and a variety of sociodemographic, smoking history, and relationship variables at baseline and quit outcomes at 4 months. RESULTS: Factor analysis of the dyadic efficacy items yielded a 1-factor scale with strong internal consistency (α = .92). Dyadic efficacy was positively associated (p < .0001) with smoking-specific support (r = .51), relationship satisfaction (r = .44), and dyadic coping (r = .54). Dyadic efficacy was not associated with age, gender, race, relationship length, smoking quantity, or previous quit attempts. Respondents with smoking partners who were willing to quit with them had higher dyadic efficacy than those whose smoking partners were not (p < .0001). Higher baseline dyadic efficacy was predictive of 7-day point prevalence quit rates at follow-up (odds ratio = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.02-1.53). CONCLUSIONS: With further study, dyadic efficacy may enhance our understanding of the role of partner relationships in smoking cessation.