Social determinants of health that have been examined in relation to prostate cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis, and survival include socioeconomic status (income, education), neighborhood disadvantage, immigration status, social support, and social network. Other social determinants of health include geographic factors such as neighborhood access to health services. Socioeconomic factors influence risk of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer incidence rates tend to be positively associated with socioeconomic status. On the other hand, low socioeconomic status is associated with increased risk of poorer survival. There are well-documented disparities in prostate cancer survival by socioeconomic status, race, education, and census tract–level poverty. The results of this review indicate that social determinants such as poverty, lack of education, immigration status, lack of social support, and social isolation play an important role in prostate cancer stage at diagnosis and survival. To address these social determinants and eliminate cancer disparities, effective interventions that account for the social and environmental contexts in which patients with cancer live and are treated are needed.

Background: Although many wearable devices for monitoring and tracking physical activity are available to consumers, relatively few research studies have been conducted to determine their efficacy in promoting health. Methods: In this article, data on the use of consumer wearable devices in promoting healthy behaviors are summarized based upon bibliographic searches in PubMed and Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection with relevant search terms through September 2016. Results: A total of 274 articles were identified in the bibliographic searches. By screening abstracts or full-text articles, six pre/post test trials and seven randomized controlled trials were identified. In initial trials, consumer wearable devices have been shown to increase physical activity and help users lose weight. However, the number of studies completed to date is small and limited by small sample sizes, short study durations, and uncertain generalizability of the findings. Conclusions: Future studies should utilize randomized controlled trial research designs, larger sample sizes, and longer study periods to better establish the efficacy of wearable devices in promoting physical activity. Additional research is needed to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of wearable devices in promoting physical activity and weight loss in community settings including communities affected by health disparities. Studies focusing on children and adolescents are also needed.