We assessed chlamydia trends, individual-level risk factors, and population-level area-based socioeconomic measures (ABSMs) associated with chlamydia infection in women attending U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) Region X Infertility Prevention Project (IPP) family planning (FP) clinics from 1997–2006. We then explored these measures within racial/ethnic subpopulations.
Methods.
Using data from 667,223 chlamydia tests obtained from women aged 15–24 years screened in 201 FP clinics, we employed a generalized mixed model with logistic link, incorporating clinic and ZIP code as random effects to adjust for risk of chlamydia associated with individual- and population-level (areal) measures for the overall population and for each racial/ethnic subpopulation.
Results.
Significant racial/ethnic differences in chlamydia persisted after adjusting for individual and aggregate factors. Relatively steep chlamydia gradients were found across racial/ethnic ABSM levels. Compared with white women, infection risk was significantly higher for black (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.93), American Indian/Alaska Native (AOR=1.62), Asian/Pacific Islander (AOR=1.42), and Hispanic (AOR=1.28) women. The impact of population-level ABSMs on chlamydia varied across racial/ethnic groups and was generally modest. Among white women, there was a significant 4% relative annual increase in predicted chlamydia during the 10-year period 1997–2006. Chlamydia positivity over time did not change for racial/ethnic minority groups after adjusting for individual- and population-level factors.
Conclusions.
Racial/ethnic differences in chlamydia persisted over time and were not mitigated by adjustment for aggregate socioeconomic position or areal racial/ethnic measures. Changes in project strategies will be needed to address racial/ethnic disparities for chlamydial infection among young female FP clinic clients.
References
1.
EngTRButlerWT, editors. Institute of Medicine. The hidden epidemic: Confronting sexually transmitted diseases. Washington: National Academies Press; 1997.
2.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US), National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Division of STD Prevention. STD health disparities [cited 2009 Jun 13]. Available from: URL: http://www.cdc.gov/STD/health-disparities/default.htm.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US), National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Division of STD Prevention. Sexually transmitted disease surveillance, 2007. Atlanta: CDC; 2008.
5.
EinwaterLARitchieJMAultKASmithEM, Gonorrhea and chlamydia infection among women visiting family planning clinics: Racial variation in prevalence and predictors. Perspect Sex Reprod Health2005;37:135–40.
6.
KlausnerJDMcFarlandWBolanGHernandezMTMolitorFLempGF, Knock-knock: A population-based survey of risk behavior, health care access, and Chlamydia trachomatis infection among low-income women in the San Francisco Bay area. J Infect Dis2001;183:1087–92.
7.
GorgosLFineDMarrazzoJ.Chlamydia positivity in American Indian/Alaska Native women screened in family planning clinics, 1997–2004. Sex Transm Dis2008;35:753–7.
8.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US), National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Division of STD Prevention. Sexually transmitted disease surveillance 2007 supplement, Chlamydia Prevalence Monitoring Project annual report 2007. Atlanta: CDC; 2009.
9.
BrittonTFDeLisleSFineD.STDs and family planning clinics: A regional program for chlamydia control that works. Am J Gynecol Health1992;6:80–7.
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for chlamydial infection: Recommendations and rationale. Am J Prev Med2001;20(3 Suppl):90–4.
12.
Office of Management and Budget (US). The Program Assessment and Rating Tool (PART) for the Office of Family Planning. Washington: OMB; 2005.
13.
FineDDickerLMosureDBermanS; Region X Infertility Prevention Project. Increasing chlamydia positivity in women screened in family planning clinics: Do we know why?Sex Transm Dis2008;35:47–52.
14.
FineDMarrazzoJ.Beyond race/ethnicity: Positivity of Chlamydia trachomatis among women attending Region 10 family planning clinics in the U.S., 1997–2005, by individual risks and area-based socioeconomic measures. Presented at: International Society for Sexually Transmitted Disease Research; 2007 Jul 30–Aug 1; Seattle. Also available from: URL: http://www.eventure-online.com/eventure/publicSearch.do?action=save&congressId=642 [cited 2010 Jun 13].
15.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US). Establishing a holistic framework to reduce inequities in HIV, viral hepatitis, STDs, and tuberculosis in the United States. Atlanta: CDC; 2010. Also available from: URL: www.cdc.gov/socialdeterminants [cited 2011 Aug 30].
16.
AralSOPadianNSHolmesKK, Advances in multilevel approaches to understanding the epidemiology and prevention of sexually transmitted infections and HIV: An overview. J Infect Dis2005;191Suppl 1:S1–6.
17.
HogbenMLeichliterJS, Social determinants and sexually transmitted disease disparities. Sex Transm Dis2008;35(12 Suppl):S13–8.
18.
EllenJMKohnRPBolanGAShiboskiSKriegerN.Socioeconomic differences in sexually transmitted disease rates among black and white adolescents, San Francisco, 1990 to 1992. Am J Public Health1995;85:1546–8.
19.
CohenDAFarleyTAMasonK.Why is poverty unhealthy? Social and physical mediators. Soc Sci Med2003;57:1631–41.
20.
BravemanPACubbinCEgerterSChideyaSMarchiKSMetzlerM, Socioeconomic status in health research: One size does not fit all. JAMA2005;294:2879–88.
21.
HallforsDDIritaniBJMillerWCBauerDJ, Sexual and drug behavior patterns and HIV and STD racial disparities: The need for new directions. Am J Public Health2007;97:125–32.
22.
HalpernCTHallforsDBauerDJIritaniBWallerMWChoH.Implications of racial and gender differences in patterns of adolescent risk behavior for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Perspect Sex Reprod Health2004;36:239–47.
23.
SmedleyBDStithAYNelsonAR, editors. Institute of Medicine. Unequal treatment: Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Washington: National Academies Press; 2003.
24.
ManhartLEMarrazzoJMFineDKeraniRPGoldenMR, Selective testing criteria for gonorrhea among young women screened for chlamydial infection: Contribution of race and geographic prevalence. J Infect Dis2007;196:731–7.
25.
PougetERKershawTSNiccolaiLMIckovicsJRBlankenshipKM, Associations of sex ratios and male incarceration rates with multiple opposite-sex partners: Potential social determinants of HIV/STI transmission. Public Health Rep2010;125Suppl 4:70–80.
26.
CohenDSpearSScribnerRKissingerPMasonKWildgenJ.“Broken windows” and the risk of gonorrhea. Am J Public Health2000;90:230–6.
27.
KriegerN.Putting health inequities on the map: Social epidemiology meets medical/health geography—an ecosocial perspective. GeoJournal2009;74:87–97.
28.
BravemanPCubbinCMarchiKEgerterSChavezG.Measuring socioeconomic status/position in studies of racial/ethnic disparities: Maternal and infant health. Public Health Rep2001;116:449–63.
29.
KriegerNChenJTWatermanPDRehkopfGHSubramanianSV, Race/ethnicity, gender, and monitoring socioeconomic gradients in health: A comparison of area-based socioeconomic measures—the Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project. Am J Public Health2003;93:1655–71.
30.
RouxAV. DiezInvestigating neighborhood and area effects on health. Am J Public Health2001;91:1783–9.
31.
KriegerNChenJTWatermanPDRehkopfDSubramanianSV, Painting a truer picture of US socioeconomic and racial/ethnic health inequalities: The Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project. Am J Public Health2005;95:312–23.
32.
KriegerNWatermanPDChenJTSoobaderMJSubramanianSV, Monitoring socioeconomic inequalities in sexually transmitted infections, tuberculosis, and violence: Geocoding and choice of area-based socioeconomic measures—the Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project (US). Public Health Rep2003;118:240–60.
33.
Office of Management and Budget (US), Tabulation Working Group, Interagency Committee for the Review of Standards for Data on Race and Ethnicity. Draft provisional guidance on the implementation of the 1997 standards for federal data on race and ethnicity. Washington: OMB; February 17, 1999.
WWAMI Rural Health Research Center. Rural-urban commuting area codes (RUCAs) [cited 2009 Jun 14]. Available from: URL: http://depts.washington.edu/uwruca.
36.
McCullaghPNelderJA, Generalized linear models. 2nd ed.New York: Chapman and Hall; 1989.
37.
SAS Institute, Inc.SAS®: Version 9.2. Cary (NC): SAS Institute, Inc.; 2008.
38.
AdimoraAASchoenbachVJ, Social context, sexual networks, and racial disparities in rates of sexually transmitted infections. J Infect Dis2005;191Suppl 1:S115–22.
39.
LaumannEOYoumY.Racial/ethnic group differences in the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases in the United States: A network explanation. Sex Transm Dis1999;26:250–61.
40.
AralSOAdimoraAAFentonKA, Understanding and responding to disparities in HIV and other sexually transmitted infections in African Americans. Lancet2008;372:33740.
WinkerMA, Measuring race and ethnicity: Why and how?JAMA2004;292:1612–4.
43.
MillerWC, Epidemiology of chlamydial infection: Are we losing ground?Sex Transm Infect2008;84:82–6.
44.
GeronimusAT, Invited commentary: Using area-based socioeconomic measures—think conceptually, act cautiously. Am J Epidemiol2006;164:835–40.
45.
GeronimusATBoundJNeidertLJ, On the validity of using census geocode characteristics to proxy individual socioeconomic characteristics. J Am Stat Assoc1996;91:529–37.
46.
GeronimusATBoundJ.Use of census-based aggregate variables to proxy for socioeconomic group: Evidence from national samples. Am J Epidemiol1998;148:475–86.
47.
SubramanianSVChenJTRehkopfDHWatermanPDKriegerN.Comparing individual- and area-based socioeconomic measures for the surveillance of health disparities: A multilevel analysis of Massachusetts births, 1989–1991. Am J Epidemiol2006;164:823–34.
48.
SubramanianSV, The relevance of multilevel statistical methods for identifying causal neighborhood effects. Soc Sci Med2004;58:1961–7.
49.
SubramanianSVChenJTRehkopfDHWatermanPDKriegerN.Subramanian et al respond to “Think conceptually, act cautiously.”Am J Epidemiol2006;164:8414.
50.
KaufmanJSCooperRSMcGeeDL, Socioeconomic status and health in blacks and whites: The problem of residual confounding and the resiliency of race. Epidemiology1997;8:621–8.
51.
SoobaderMLeClereFBHaddenWMauryB.Using aggregate geographic data to proxy individual socioeconomic status: Does size matter?Am J Public Health2001;91:632–6.
