Effects of Residential Instability of Renters on Their Perceived Health Status: Findings from the Korean Welfare Panel Study

Rental Housing Type and Self-Reported General Health and Mental Health Status: Evidence from the Canadian Housing Survey 2018-2019

Using the Canadian Housing Survey, 2018-2019, we examined self-reported general and mental health among tenants residing in various housing types, including cooperative, non-profit, government, and private housing. Adjusting for confounders, we discovered that tenants in not-for-profit housing reported the highest odds, over four and half times (odds ratio 4.63), of poor general health compared to tenants in privately owned housing in Canada. On the other hand, the odds were reversed for tenants in cooperative housing and government housing, with 24% and 33% lower odds of poor general health, respectively, compared to tenants in privately owned housing. Moreover, we found that tenants in not-for-profit (1.26) and government housing (1.43) reported higher odds of poor mental health. On the other hand, tenants in cooperative housing reported 42% lower odds of poor mental health than tenants in privately owned housing. Furthermore, we observed variations in the odds of poor general and poor mental health among tenants from different equity-seeking groups across different housing types. These findings highlight the importance of considering housing type and equity factors in understanding health outcomes among tenants.

[Socioeconomic status and cecal adenocarcinoma mortality risk: an American population-based analysis]

OBJECTIVE

To explore the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and disease mortality in patients with cecal adenocarcinoma in America through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End results (SEER) database.

METHODS

The SEER database was queried for patients with cecal adenocarcinoma in America diagnosed from 2011 to 2015. Factor analysis, cluster analysis, and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used for data analysis. Five social security factors were identified: factor 1, economic and educational disadvantage; factor 2, characteristics related to immigration (language isolation and foreign birth); factor 3, high relocation rate in the county; factor 4, high intra-state relocation rate; and factor 5, high domestic relocation rate. Five clusters defined by SES were identified.

RESULTS

The number of all-cause deaths among 17 185 patients was 5948, and the number of survivors was 11, 237. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, with cluster 1 (low poverty rate and high education level) as the reference, the hazard ratio (HR) of cluster 3 (high intra-county mobility rate) was 1.13 (95% CI: 1.04-1.21, P < 0.05), and the risk was 13% higher than that of cluster 1. The HR of cluster 4 (low language isolation, foreign birth, housing overcrowding, and intra-country mobility rates) was 1.15 (95% CI: 1.07- 1.24, P < 0.001) with a 15% higher risk than cluster 1. The HR of cluster 5 (economic and educational disadvantages, immigration-related characteristics, and low intra-country mobility) was 1.11 (95% CI: 1.03-1.20, P < 0.01) with a 11% higher risk. The factors related to SES indicators were based on the mortality of patients with cecal adenocarcinoma, indicating that low economic and education levels are risk factors for cecal adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSION

Low socioeconomic status is associated with an increased risk of death in patients with cecal adenocarcinoma in the United States and show different distribution patterns based on population. Improving health insurance policies and strengthening psychotherapy can provide guidance for improving prognosis f cecal adenocarcinoma patients.

Evaluation and Prediction Analysis of 3- and 5-Year Survival Rates of Patients with Cecal Adenocarcinoma Based on Period Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cecal adenocarcinoma has a high degree of malignancy and poor prognosis, thereby bringing serious disease burden to patients. The long-term survival rate of patients with cecal adenocarcinoma deserves us to explore more deeply. In addition, appropriate methods that evaluate the survival outcome of cecal adenocarcinoma are few.

METHODS

This study used the data provided by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate and predict the survival rates of patients with cecal adenocarcinoma from 2002 to 2016 and from 2017 to 2021, respectively. The cohort of population taken are all older than 20 years old, which is from National Cancer Institute. The period analysis was used to check the data in the SEER database. Reliable results could be obtained using period analysis, which provided important information for prevention and treatment strategies.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2016, the relative survival rate of patients with cecal adenocarcinoma increased yearly. Compared with those in previous 15 years, the relative survival rate between 2017 and 2021 still increased but to a low extent. The relative survival rates of patients with cecal adenocarcinoma were remarkably different in terms of age, sex, race, differentiation grade, stages, and socioeconomic status. Even if there is a significant improvement, the survival rate of patients with distant-stage cancer is at a very low level.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the survival rate of patients with cecal adenocarcinoma in the past 15 years is helpful in predicting the future trend and providing basic data and scientific basis to evaluate the harm of cecal adenocarcinoma to patients' health, prepare cancer prevention plans, and evaluate the effect of cancer prevention and treatment by exploring the differences in survival rate corresponding to different ages, sexes, races, differentiation grades, stages, and socioeconomic status.