Literature DB >> 11341350

A meta-analysis of mammography screening promotion.

P A Ratner1, J L Bottorff, J L Johnson, R Cook, C Y Lovato.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence the effectiveness of interventions in increasing women's use of mammography screening programs. To this end, we conducted a systematic literature review of studies published between 1966 and 1997. In this review, we recorded data about the year and country in which studies were completed, the study design, the methods for measuring screening rates, various sample characteristics, the nature of the intervention, and the resulting screening rates. The PRECEDE model was used as a framework to make distinctions between the various interventions. To synthesize evidence about the baseline screening rates and the effect of interventions on the incidence of mammography screening, we fit random-effects logistic regression models. These models revealed that more recent studies (those conducted from 1990 to 1996) were associated with higher screening rates (odds ratio [OR], 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-3.9). Conversely, those designed to target older women (minimum age, 50-65 years) and those set in clinics exhibited smaller screening rates (OR, 0.6, 95% CI, 0.3-1.0, and OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.8, respectively). The meta-analyses also suggested methodologic issues that must be considered before the relative strength of various interventions can be assessed rigorously.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11341350

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Detect Prev        ISSN: 0361-090X


  4 in total

Review 1.  Interventions to promote repeat breast cancer screening with mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Amy McQueen; Jasmin A Tiro; Deborah J del Junco
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Racial differences in knowledge, attitudes, and cancer screening practices among a triracial rural population.

Authors:  Electra D Paskett; Cathy Tatum; Julia Rushing; Robert Michielutte; Ronny Bell; Kristie Long Foley; Marisa Bittoni; Stephanie Dickinson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Promoting regular mammography screening II. Results from a randomized controlled trial in US women veterans.

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Deborah J del Junco; Jasmin A Tiro; Sharon P Coan; Catherine A Perz; Lori A Bastian; William Rakowski; Wen Chan; David R Lairson; Amy McQueen; Maria E Fernandez; Cynthia Warrick; Arada Halder; Carlo DiClemente
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Screening uptake in a well-established diabetic retinopathy screening program: the role of geographical access and deprivation.

Authors:  Graham P Leese; Paul Boyle; Zhiqiang Feng; Alistair Emslie-Smith; John D Ellis
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2008-08-26       Impact factor: 17.152

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.