Literature DB >> 15159302

What factors are associated with diagnostic follow-up after abnormal mammograms? Findings from a U.S. National Survey.

K Robin Yabroff1, Nancy Breen, Sally W Vernon, Helen I Meissner, Andrew N Freedman, Rachel Ballard-Barbash.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal mammogram in a national sample of women in the U.S. The sample was selected from the year 2000 National Health Interview Survey and included 1901 women aged 30 and above who reported ever having an abnormal mammogram. The outcome measure was receipt of at least some diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal mammogram. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to explore the associations between sociodemographic characteristics, general health and health behaviors, cancer risk and risk perceptions, and health care utilization characteristics and follow-up. Approximately 9% of women who reported ever having abnormal mammograms reported not completing any additional diagnostic follow-up. Controlling for all other factors, women with less than a high school education were less likely to report follow-up after an abnormal mammogram than were women who had at least completed college (odds ratio = 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.32, 0.98). Younger women and women in poorer health were also less likely to report follow-up. Women who perceived a high versus low level of cancer in their family were more likely to report follow-up (odds ratio = 1.65; 95% confidence interval: 1.04, 2.62), controlling for all other factors. In a national sample of women with abnormal mammograms, a substantial number did not complete any diagnostic follow-up, potentially reducing the effectiveness of mammography screening programs in the U.S. Additional research on subsequent screening behaviors for women with incomplete follow-up and in-depth exploration of the roles of patient-provider interactions and health care system factors related to the index abnormal mammogram is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15159302

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  38 in total

1.  The impact of obesity on follow-up after an abnormal screening mammogram.

Authors:  Ellen A Schur; Joann E Elmore; Tracy Onega; Karen J Wernli; Edward A Sickles; Sebastien Haneuse
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Urban women's preferences for learning of their mammogram result: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Erin N Marcus; Darlene Drummond; Noella Dietz
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  Psychosocial determinants of mammography follow-up after receipt of abnormal mammography results in medically underserved women.

Authors:  Alecia Malin Fair; Debra Wujcik; Jin-Mann Sally Lin; Wei Zheng; Kathleen M Egan; Ana M Grau; Victoria L Champion; Kenneth A Wallston
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2010-02

4.  Nativity status and mammography use: results from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  Tiffany M Billmeier; Florence J Dallo
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2011-10

5.  How do breast imaging centers communicate results to women with limited English proficiency and other barriers to care?

Authors:  Erin N Marcus; Tulay Koru-Sengul; Feng Miao; Monica Yepes; Lee Sanders
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2014-06

6.  Diagnostic resolution of cancer screening abnormalities at community health centers.

Authors:  Richard G Roetzheim; Ji-Hyun Lee; Ercilia R Calcano; Cathy D Meade; William J Fulp; Kristen J Wells
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2012-08

7.  Reducing racial/ethnic disparities in female breast cancer: screening rates and stage at diagnosis.

Authors:  Franco Sassi; Harold S Luft; Edward Guadagnoli
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Timeliness of breast cancer diagnosis and initiation of treatment in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1996-2005.

Authors:  Lisa C Richardson; Janet Royalty; William Howe; William Helsel; William Kammerer; Vicki B Benard
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Predictors of resolution in navigated patients with abnormal cancer screening tests.

Authors:  Paul L Reiter; Mira L Katz; Gregory S Young; Electra D Paskett
Journal:  J Community Support Oncol       Date:  2014-12

10.  Socioeconomic disparities in breast cancer survival: relation to stage at diagnosis, treatment and race.

Authors:  Xue Qin Yu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.