Key result
Lacking supplementary health insurance is linked to ~34% lower reported incident kidney stone risk.
Why the study?
Are occupational and social factors associated with incident kidney stone disease in a Brazilian working population?
Cohort (n=2,986)
No
Are occupational and social factors associated with incident kidney stone disease in a Brazilian working population?
Hazard Ratio: 0.66 (95% CI 0.44–0.97)
Lack of supplementary health insurance is paradoxically associated with lower reported kidney stone incidence, likely due to detection bias and limited healthcare access.
Background: While occupational factors and social determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with kidney stone disease (KSD) risk in US cohorts, their role in other populations remains unexplored. We investigated the extent to which these factors are associated with KSD incidence in a Brazilian cohort. Hypothesis: Occupational and social factors are associated with KSD risk in a Brazilian working population. Methods: The Pro-Saude study followed employees of Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro from 1999 to 2012. Baseline exposures included occupation (International Standard Classification of Occupations skill level), work hours/week, years worked, household income, education, and supplementary health insurance status. Incident KSD was defined as a first self-reported kidney stone between baseline and follow-up visits (2001, 2012). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models estimated the risk of KSD across exposures, adjusting for known KSD risk factors. Results: Among 2,986 participants (mean age 40.4 years; 43.3% male), 148 developed KSD over 13 years. Participants without supplementary health insurance had significantly lower reported KSD incidence than those with supplementary health insurance (adjusted HR 0.66 [95% CI 0.44-0.97]; Figure 1). Other occupational and social factors showed no statistically significant associations with KSD risk. Conclusion: No supplementary health insurance was paradoxically associated with lower reported kidney stone incidence, a finding likely driven by detection bias rather than a protective effect. This suggests that individuals with more limited access to healthcare have lower rates of kidney stone diagnosis and reporting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Crivelli et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Kidney stone disease (n=2,986). No supplementary health insurance vs. Supplementary health insurance was evaluated on Incident kidney stone disease (first self-reported kidney stone) (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44-0.97). Lack of supplementary health insurance was associated with a lower reported incidence of kidney stones compared to having insurance (adjusted HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.44-0.97).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: