Why the study?
Does cardiovascular disease mortality differ between First Nations people and non-Aboriginal adults?
Does cardiovascular disease mortality differ between First Nations people and non-Aboriginal adults?
First Nations people in Canada experience significantly higher cardiovascular mortality than non-Aboriginal adults, which is only partially explained by income and education disparities.
Disparities warrant heightened CVD vigilance in First Nations care; leaves open causal pathways and targeted interventions beyond socioeconomic factors.
OBJECTIVE: To compare cardiovascular disease mortality patterns between First Nations people and non-Aboriginal adults by sex and by income adequacy quintile and level of educational attainment. METHODS: A 15% sample of 1991 Canadian census respondents aged 25 years or older was previously linked to 11 years of mortality data. In this study, First Nations people were defined by North American Indian ethnic origin (ancestry), registration under the Indian Act, and/or membership in an Indian band or First Nation. The cohort included 62 400 First Nations people and 2 624 300 non-Aboriginal people. RESULTS: Compared to non-Aboriginal cohort members, the age-standardized cardiovascular disease mortality rate was 30% higher for First Nations men and 76% higher for First Nations women. This represented an excess of 58 deaths and 71 deaths per 100 000 person-years at risk, for First Nations men and women, respectively. Within each income adequacy quintile (adjusted for family size and region of residence) and level of educational attainment, the risk of dying from cardiovascular disease was higher for First Nations people compared to their non-Aboriginal counterparts. CONCLUSION: First Nations people had higher rates of death from cardiovascular disease than non-Aboriginal Canadians within each income quintile and level of education. Income and education accounted for 67% and 25% of the excess mortality of First Nations men and women respectively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tjepkema et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: