Cancer-risk Behaviours in Adolescence - Essay Example

Article Critique "Socioeconomic disparities in cancer-risk behaviours in adolescence: baseline results from the Health and Behaviour in Teenagers Study (HABITS)- London, UK At the outset it is worth beginning the critique of this article going over 6000 words with a very wise (and humorous) quote from the genius Lewis Carroll in his very famous work "Alice in the Wonderland" to illustrate the difficulty faced by authors of large pieces of work in keeping their work in context and relevant while at the same time being able to estimate their own direction and stance in relation to the research. Would you tell me, please Which way I ought to go from here" "That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cat. "I don't much care where -" said Alice. "Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat Struggling with the same issues of direction and context in this article, "Socioeconomic disparities in cancer-risk behaviours in adolescence: baseline results from the Health and Behaviour in Teenagers Study (HABITS) the authors have, just as the title seeks to demonstrate, attempted to find the link between Socio-economic factors and how the presence or the lack thereof of such factors will contribute to the long term risk of cancer in adolescents. The methodology states rather ambitiously that these five factors are to include the Body Mass Index of the subjects, their food intake, smoking and tendency to exercise and the subject base is to be assessed with in 4320 students ages 11 to 12, from 36 schools. Firstly it is not clear at this point how the authors aim to define risky and secondly the phrase "Neighbourhood socioeconomic deprivation for each student's area of residence was matched to their postcode" is vague. (J. Wardle et al. 2003). If this study is in the United Kingdom alone it does not make seem to provide a useful detail to discriminate through post codes. While the authors have tried their best to provide for racial and ethnic gaps in the results the results clearly state that they may be biased due to the fact that "most differences persisted after controlling for ethnicity. A clear deprivation gradient emerged for each risk factor, indicating the linear nature of the relationship".(J. Wardle et al. 2003). Most of the findings of this article seem to state the obvious. There have been a number of works on socio economic factors and their link with Cancer in the long term whereas a similar position has been taken as to the racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in cancer mortality as being based upon the practices of the tobacco, alcohol, and food industries as health-damaging practices. (Varghese C 1996, Pui C-H, Boyett 1995, Rat Clive 1991 , Rees P 1995). However upon further independent research undertaken through reputable data bases like Blackwell Synergy and Science Direct it was surprising to see that there were little if any related studies pertaining to the risk of cancer within young adults in later life arising from socioeconomic and environmental factors.(Some useful books are Carstairs V, 1991,Kaplan EL 1958). Some interesting insights were gained from the perusal of the latest issue of the "Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved"(2008) which had a number of interesting readings on the connection between poor social and economic conditions. However these points of view were either devoted to under developed countries, to breast and prostrate cancer or the risk with in elderly people.(Some similar works which were compared included Winter H 1990,Neumark-Sztainer D 1996,Sobal J 1989;Townsend P, 1988,Morris R 1991) . In this regard it may be said that this study has its significance with in its special aim to explore these risks at their root when they affect young adults in their early teenage. Again the logical query entails that have the authors actually made the effort to brand Cancer as a life style disease and ignored its chronic and clinical causes The author makes some valid points in the introduction as to why the lifestyle of the modern British teenager is out of control as in due to the cultural freedom provided by the society. At the outset we have a credible study ambitious enough to monitor five years of observation and a large sample base to adjust for socio economic and racial discrepancies. The article is commendable indeed for its well-defined conceptual framework, detailed data collection and description of subjects, researcher subjectivity, and a thread of transparency that ties all of the sections of issues with each other. Yet the area where this study is not robust is the over all lack of a literature review which seems to have been mingled with the introduction. Equally the title summary and the abstract do not match as the title refers generally to "Socioeconomic Factors" and it is revealed later on that these are just five factors and have little connection with socioeconomic factors alone. For example the entire Britain is facing a health food crisis as the authors admit themselves, so how can the lack of health food amongst the lower income classes alone put them through a higher risk of Cancer All in all the study does not seem to establish a solid foundation by addressing the competing points of view of other academics/professionals. My hypotheses evaluation found that the ordinary non-technical browser interested in the article would have little to interest in this regard. I have a similar opinion about the keywords which could have been more detailed. The raw data that has been annexed to the article is convincing enough as it is sufficiently complicated however it is felt that slightly more could have been done in the discussion and analysis of these results. All in all this article is significant for further future research in terms of its methodology; which albeit briefly mentioned in the abstract, is an attempt by the authors to validate the methods used and if the reader can find the analysis of the data agreeable to his own views this would form a good sort of guidance for their conceptualization of the problem and understanding of any solutions therefore. I would not say based on my reading that the introduction was well organized and clear because its layout combined the literature review with the introduction or rather lacked a proper literature review altogether.. In conclusion whereas the article can be praised for its originality and its promising role in aiding future research certain of its aims suffer from structural and conceptual pitfalls as discussed in the main body of the critique. References 1. Kerlinger, F, N, 1970. Foundations of Behavioural Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 2. Punch, K. (1998). Introduction To Social Research: Quantitative And Qualitative Approaches. London: Sage 3. Wainwright, D. (1997). Can Sociological Research Be Qualitative, Critical And Valid The Qualitative Report, Vol. 3, No. 2. Online. Http://Www.Nova.Edu/Ssss/Qr/Qr3-2/Wain.Html. 4. Varghese C, Barrett JH, Johnston C, Shires M, Rider L, Forman. High risk of lymphomas in children of Asian origin: ethnicity, or confounding by socio-economic status. Br J Cancer 1996, 74 5. Pui C-H, Boyett JM, Hancock ML, Pratt CB, Meyer WH, Crist WM. Outcome of treatment for childhood cancer in black as compared with white children: the St. Jude children's research hospital experience, J AmMed Assoc 1995, 273, 633637. 6. Rat Clive P, ed. Ethnicity in the 1991 Census, Volume 3, Social Geography and Ethnicity in Britain: Geographical Spread, Spatial Concentration and Internal Migration. London, HMSO, 1996 7. Rees P, Phillips D, Medway D. The socio-economic geography of ethnic groups in two northern British cities. Environment and Planning A 1995, 27, . 8. Carstairs V, Morris R. Deprivation and Health in Scotland., Aberdeen, Aberdeen University Press, 1991. 9. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1958, 53, 457481. 10. Simon R, Altman DG. Statistical aspects of prognostic factor studies in oncology. Br J Cancer 1994, 69, 979985. 11. Palmer MKB, Machin D. Survival Analysis: A Practical Approach. Chichester, Wiley, 1995. 12. Schoenfeld D. Partial residuals for the proportional hazards regression model. Biometrika 1982, 69, 239241. 13. Collett D. Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research. London, Chapman and Hall, 1994. 14. Bhopal RS, Rankin J. Cancer in minority ethnic populations: priorities from epidemiological data. Br J Cancer 1996,74. 15. Winter H, Cheng KK, Cummins C, Maric R, Silcocks P,Varghese C. Cancer incidence in the south Asian population of England (199092). Br J Cancer 1990, 79, 645654. 16. Neumark-Sztainer D, Story M, Resnick MD, Blum RWM. Correlates of inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption among adolescents.Prev Med 1996;25:497-505. 17. Sobal J, Stunkard AJ. Socioeconomic status and obesity: a review of the literature. Psychol Bull 1989;105:260-75. 18. Wardle J, Robb K, Johnson F. Assessing SES in adolescents: the validity of a home affluence scale. J Epidemiol Comm Health 2002; 56:595-9. 19. Townsend P, Phillimorse P, Beattie A. Health and deprivation: inequality and the North. London: Croom Helm, 1988. 20. Morris R, Carstairs V. Which deprivation A comparison of selected deprivation indexes. J Public Health Med 1991;13:318-26. Read More