Table 3.
Participation rate ratios (PRR) [95% CI] for cervical screening by region, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women aged 20–69 years, Queensland, Australia, 2013–2017.
| Variable | Adjusted Participation rate ratios [95% CI]1,2,3 | Interaction (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status, variable) p-value4 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander | other Australian | ||
| Region | p < 0.001 | p = 0.011 | P < 0.001 |
| Rest of QLD | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| North QLD | 1.15 [1.03, 1.28] | 1.09 [1.01, 1.20] | |
| Age group (years) | p < 0.001 | p < 0.001 | P = 0.072 |
| 20–29 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| 30–39 | 0.90 [0.86, 0.95] | 0.87 [0.84, 0.89] | |
| 40–49 | 0.83 [0.78, 0.87] | 0.81 [0.79, 0.84] | |
| 50–59 | 0.72 [0.68, 0.77] | 0.72 [0.70, 0.74] | |
| 60–69 | 0.60 [0.56, 0.65] | 0.59 [0.57, 0.61] | |
| Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander female (%)5 | p < 0.001 | p < 0.001 | p < 0.001 |
| Low (<2.0%) | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| High (≥2.0%) | 1.09 [1.02, 1.17] | 0.93 [0.89, 0.96] | |
| Area-level disadvantage6 | p = 0.033 | p = 0.078 | p < 0.001 |
| Most advantaged | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Advantaged | 1.07 [0.97, 1.19] | 0.91 [0.82, 1.00] | |
| Middle SES | 1.04 [0.93, 1.16] | 0.91 [0.81, 1.01] | |
| Disadvantaged | 1.15 [1.02, 1.29] | 0.89 [0.78, 1.01] | |
| Most disadvantaged | 1.16 [1.03, 1.32] | 0.84 [0.73, 0.97] | |
| Remoteness7 | p = 0.004 | p= 0.056 | p < 0.001 |
| Major cities | 0.95 [0.86, 1.06] | 1.09 [0.93, 1.27] | |
| Inner regional | 0.91 [0.83, 0.99] | 0.91 [0.79, 1.05] | |
| Outer regional | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Remote | 1.31 [1.16, 1.49] | 1.01 [0.79, 1.30] | |
| Very remote | 0.89 [0.77, 1.02] | 0.97 [0.75, 1.24] | |
| Closest Pap test provider8,9, | p < 0.001 | p = 0.062 | p < 0.001 |
| Non-ACCHO | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| ACCHO10 | 1.11 [1.03, 1.19] | 0.93 [0.84, 1.00] | |
| Number ACCHO providers8,11 | p < 0.001 | p = 0.019 | p < 0.001 |
| None | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| One | 1.25 [1.13, 1.37] | 1.19 [1.03, 1.36] | |
| Two to four | 1.23 [1.10, 1.36] | 1.15 [1.01, 1.36] | |
| Five or more | 1.28 [1.04, 1.56] | 1.43 [1.03, 1.99] | |
| Number non-ACCHO providers8,11 | p < 0.001 | p = 0.013 | p < 0.001 |
| None | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| One | 1.18 [1.02, 1.37] | 1.13 [0.97, 1.33] | |
| Two to four | 1.16 [1.02, 1.31] | 1.13 [1.01, 1.30] | |
| Five to nine | 1.16 [1.03, 1.32] | 1.21 [1.05, 1.38] | |
| 10 or more | 1.39 [1.23, 1.58] | 1.25 [1.09, 1.44] | |
ACCHO, Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Organisation; CI, confidence Interval.
1. Estimated using negative binomial models, with outcome being number of screened women and offset the number of eligible women.
2. P-values from Wald’s joint test of coefficients for multivariate negative binomial regression.
3. Estimated from fully adjusted main effect negative binomial models stratified by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status.
4. P-values from Wald’s X2 test for interaction effect from fully adjusted main-effects model with interaction term between each independent variable and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status.
5. Based on 2016 Australian Census.
6. Area-level disadvantage was defined by the 2016 SEIFA Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage.
7. Remote areas were defined by the Remoteness Areas 2016 classification.
8. Provider refers to provider of a Pap test and is based on medical centers or general practitioner practices that may have multiple health professionals who provide Pap tests.
9. Based on travel distance from 2016 (SA2) at screening to geocoded street address of a Pap test provider.
10. The category ACCHO includes those SA2’s for which the closest Pap test provider is either an ACCHO or both (ACCHO, non-ACCHO).
11. Number providers by 2016 Australian Statistical Geography Statistical Area Level 2 (SA2) for a woman at screening.