Literature DB >> 1415867

Measuring the use of mammography: two methods compared.

D Degnan1, R Harris, J Ranney, D Quade, J A Earp, J Gonzalez.   

Abstract

Population studies often estimate mammography use using women's self-reports. In one North Carolina county, we compared self-report surveys with a second method--counting mammograms per population--for 1987 and 1989. Estimates from self-reports (35% in 1987, 55% in 1989) were considerably higher than those from mammogram counts (20% in 1987, 36% in 1989). We then confirmed 66% of self-reports in the past year. Self-reported use is more accurate regarding whether a woman has had a mammogram than when she had it, but self-reports accurately measure change over time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1415867      PMCID: PMC1695877          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.82.10.1386

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  3 in total

1.  How valid are mammography self-reports?

Authors:  E S King; B K Rimer; B Trock; A Balshem; P Engstrom
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Accuracy of women's self-report of their last Pap smear.

Authors:  J A Sawyer; J A Earp; R H Fletcher; F F Daye; T M Wynn
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1989-08       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Screening mammography for women 50 years of age and older: practices and trends, 1987.

Authors:  R F Anda; D G Sienko; P L Remington; E M Gentry; J S Marks
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1990 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.043

  3 in total
  31 in total

1.  The association of race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and physician recommendation for mammography: who gets the message about breast cancer screening?

Authors:  M S O'Malley; J A Earp; S T Hawley; M J Schell; H F Mathews; J Mitchell
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Increasing use of mammography among older, rural African American women: results from a community trial.

Authors:  Jo Anne Earp; Eugenia Eng; Michael S O'Malley; Mary Altpeter; Garth Rauscher; Linda Mayne; Holly F Mathews; Kathy S Lynch; Bahjat Qaqish
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Subgroup-specific effects of questionnaire wording on population-based estimates of mammography prevalence.

Authors:  P Z Siegel; J R Qualters; P D Mowery; S Campostrini; C Leutzinger; D V McQueen
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Health insurance and mammography: would a Medicare buy-in take us to universal screening?

Authors:  Donald H Taylor; Lynn Van Scoyoc; Sarah Tropman Hawley
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Disability as a public health issue: findings and reflections from the Massachusetts survey of secondary conditions.

Authors:  Nancy Wilber; Monika Mitra; Deborah Klein Walker; Deborah Allen; Allan R Meyers; Paul Tupper
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.911

6.  Enthusiasm or uncertainty: small area variations in the use of mammography services in Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  V Goel; K Iron; J I Williams
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 3.710

7.  The influence of breast self-examination on subsequent mammography participation.

Authors:  Susan E Jelinski; Colleen J Maxwell; Jay Onysko; Christina M Bancej
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Do social network characteristics predict mammography screening practices?

Authors:  Jennifer D Allen; Anne M Stoddard; Glorian Sorensen
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  2007-07-09

9.  Bias associated with self-report of prior screening mammography.

Authors:  Kathleen A Cronin; Diana L Miglioretti; Martin Krapcho; Binbing Yu; Berta M Geller; Patricia A Carney; Tracy Onega; Eric J Feuer; Nancy Breen; Rachel Ballard-Barbash
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Self-report versus medical records for assessing cancer-preventive services delivery.

Authors:  Jeanne M Ferrante; Pamela Ohman-Strickland; Karissa A Hahn; Shawna V Hudson; Eric K Shaw; Jesse C Crosson; Benjamin F Crabtree
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.