Literature DB >> 16686802

Breast cancer risk and provider recommendation for mammography among recently unscreened women in the United States.

Susan A Sabatino1, Risa B Burns, Roger B Davis, Russell S Phillips, Ellen P McCarthy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: Many women with increased breast cancer risk have not been screened recently. Provider recommendation for mammography is an important reason many women undergo screening. We examined the association between breast cancer risk and reported provider recommendation for mammography in recently unscreened women.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using 2000 National Health Interview Survey. PARTICIPANTS: In all, 1673 women ages 40 to 75 years without cancer who saw a health care provider in the prior year and had no mammogram within 2 years. MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS: We assessed breast cancer risk by Gail score and risk factors. We used multivariable logistic regression models in SUDAAN adjusted for age, race and illness burden, to examine the association between risk and reported recommendation for mammography within 1 year for all women and women ages 50 to 75 years.
RESULTS: Of 1673 recently unscreened women, 29% reported a recommendation. Twelve percent of women had increased Gail risk and of these recently unscreened, high-risk women, 25% reported a recommendation. After adjustment, high-risk women were not more likely to report a recommendation than average-risk women. Results were similar for women 50 to 75 years old. No individual breast cancer factors other than age were associated with reporting a recommendation.
CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 70% of recently unscreened women seen by a health care provider in the prior year reported no recommendation for mammography, regardless of breast cancer risk. This did not include women who received a recommendation and were screened. Increasing reported recommendation rates may represent an opportunity to increase screening participation among recently unscreened women, particularly for women with increased breast cancer risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16686802      PMCID: PMC1484729          DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00348.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  40 in total

1.  Tailored risk notification for women with a family history of breast cancer.

Authors:  R Bastani; A E Maxwell; C Bradford; I P Das; K X Yan
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 4.018

2.  ACOG Committee Opinion. Primary and preventive care: periodic assessments.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Screening for breast cancer: recommendations and rationale.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-09-03       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Estimates of the number of US women who could benefit from tamoxifen for breast cancer chemoprevention.

Authors:  Andrew N Freedman; Barry I Graubard; Sowmya R Rao; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Mitchell H Gail
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-04-02       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  GPs' management of women seeking help for familial breast cancer.

Authors:  G H de Bock; T P Vliet Vlieland; M Hakkeling; J Kievit; M P Springer
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 2.267

6.  Perceived risk of breast cancer: influence of heuristic thinking.

Authors:  Noreen C Facione
Journal:  Cancer Pract       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct

7.  What influences family physicians' cancer screening decisions when practice guidelines are unclear or conflicting?

Authors:  Fred Tudiver; Remi Guibert; Jeannie Haggerty; Antonio Ciampi; Wendy Medved; Judith Belle Brown; Carol Herbert; Alan Katz; Paul Ritvo; Bill Grant; Vivek Goel; Philip Smith; Maeve O'Beirne; J Ivan Williams; Peter Moliner
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 0.493

8.  The gynecologist's role in mammography screening in absence of a public health program.

Authors:  Eric Chamot; Thomas V Perneger
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2002-11-07       Impact factor: 2.344

9.  Do physicians tailor their recommendations for breast cancer risk reduction based on patient's risk?

Authors:  Jennifer S Haas; Celia P Kaplan; Steven E Gregorich; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Genevieve Des Jarlais
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Breast carcinoma screening and risk perception among women at increased risk for breast carcinoma: results from a national survey.

Authors:  Susan A Sabatino; Risa B Burns; Roger B Davis; Russell S Phillips; Ya-Hua Chen; Ellen P McCarthy
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  10 in total

1.  Breast cancer screening is risky business.

Authors:  René Salazar; Judith M E Walsh
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Patient-provider discussions about lung cancer screening pre- and post-guidelines: Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS).

Authors:  Lisa Carter-Harris; Andy S L Tan; Ramzi G Salloum; Kelly C Young-Wolff
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2016-05-17

3.  Predisposing, Enabling, and Reinforcing Factors Associated with Mammography Referrals in U.S. Primary Care Practices.

Authors:  Susan A Sabatino; Trevor Thompson; Steven S Coughlin; Susan M Schappert
Journal:  Open Health Serv Policy J       Date:  2009-01-01

4.  Breast and cervical cancer screening patterns among American Indian women at IHS clinics in Montana and Wyoming.

Authors:  Robin Taylor Wilson; Jennifer Giroux; Kathryn Rita Kasicky; Bethany Hemlock Fatupaito; Eric C Wood; Renee Crichlow; Neil A Sun Rhodes; Jennifer Tingueley; Andrea Walling; Kathryn Langwell; Nathaniel Cobb
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.792

5.  Physician and Family Recommendations to Obtain a Mammogram and Mammography Intentions: The Moderating Effects of Perceived Seriousness and Risk of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Yamile Molina; Beti Thompson; Rachel M Ceballos
Journal:  J Womens Health Care       Date:  2014-11

6.  How do rural health care providers and patients view barriers to colorectal cancer screening? Insights from appalachian kentucky.

Authors:  Jennifer Hatcher; Mark B Dignan; Nancy Schoenberg
Journal:  Nurs Clin North Am       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.208

7.  Breast cancer surveillance practices among women previously treated with chest radiation for a childhood cancer.

Authors:  Kevin C Oeffinger; Jennifer S Ford; Chaya S Moskowitz; Lisa R Diller; Melissa M Hudson; Joanne F Chou; Stephanie M Smith; Ann C Mertens; Tara O Henderson; Debra L Friedman; Wendy M Leisenring; Leslie L Robison
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-01-28       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Family/friend recommendations and mammography intentions: the roles of perceived mammography norms and support.

Authors:  Yamile Molina; India J Ornelas; Sarah L Doty; Sonia Bishop; Shirley A A Beresford; Gloria D Coronado
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2015-08-31

9.  The National Prevention Strategy and breast cancer screening: scientific evidence for public health action.

Authors:  Marcus Plescia; Mary C White
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  Preventive screening of women who use complementary and alternative medicine providers.

Authors:  Lois Downey; Patrick T Tyree; William E Lafferty
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.681

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.