Literature DB >> 16830509

Efforts to locate low-income women for a study on mammography rescreening: implications for public health practice.

Janet Kay Bobo1, Jean A Shapiro, Jennifer Brustrom.   

Abstract

Public health practice often requires locating individuals in the community. This article presents information on the methods and amount of time and effort required to locate over 2300 low-income and minority women in Maryland, New York, Ohio, and Texas for a mammography rescreening study. In 1999, we identified 2528 low-income women who had a mammogram in 1997 funded by the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Starting 30 months after that mammogram, we made numerous attempts to locate each woman while recording the number of calls, letters, and tracing attempts used and the date she was found. More than 93% of the women were located. On average, it took 73.8 days (range 1-492 days) and 7.2 calls and letters (range 1-48) to reach each woman. Locating women in racial and ethnic minority groups required more time and effort. About 10% of all located women were found only after our subject tracing protocol was implemented. The percentage of located women increased markedly with more months of effort and additional calls and letters. Because women who were more difficult to locate were less likely to have been rescreened, the mammography rescreening percentages at the end of the study were slightly lower than they would have been had we terminated location efforts after 1-3 months. Locating low-income women in the community is difficult, particularly when obtaining a high response rate from all groups is important. Terminating data collection prematurely may decrease minority group representation and introduce bias.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16830509     DOI: 10.1007/s10900-005-9006-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Community Health        ISSN: 0094-5145


  11 in total

1.  Tracking procedures and attrition containment in a long-term follow-up of a community-based ADHD sample.

Authors:  C S Hartsough; L M Babinski; N M Lambert
Journal:  J Child Psychol Psychiatry       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 8.982

2.  The effect of nonresponse on prevalence estimates for a referent population: insights from a population-based cohort study. Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study Investigators.

Authors:  E Shahar; A R Folsom; R Jackson
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.797

3.  Recruitment of participants for the Estrogen Replacement and Atherosclerosis (ERA) trial. a comparison of costs, yields, and participant characteristics from community- and hospital-based recruitment strategies.

Authors:  S Folmar; F Oates-Williams; P Sharp; D Reboussin; J Smith; K Cheshire; J Macer; K Potvin Klein; D Herrington
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2001-02

4.  Follow-up of a large cohort of Black women.

Authors:  C Russell; J R Palmer; L L Adams-Campbell; L Rosenberg
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2001-11-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Comparison of early and late respondents to a postal health survey questionnaire.

Authors:  A Paganini-Hill; G Hsu; A Chao; R K Ross
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 4.822

6.  Psychopathology and attrition in the Baltimore ECA 15-year follow-up 1981-1996.

Authors:  M A Badawi; W W Eaton; J Myllyluoma; L G Weimer; J Gallo
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.328

7.  Methodological issues for health-related surveys of multicultural older women.

Authors:  J G Zapka; L Chasan-Taber; C Bigelow; T Hurley
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 2.651

8.  Successful techniques for retention of study participants in an inner-city population.

Authors:  Y D Senturia; K McNiff Mortimer; D Baker; P Gergen; H Mitchell; C Joseph; H J Wedner
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1998-12

9.  Does non-responder bias have a significant effect on the results in a postal questionnaire study?

Authors:  J T Kotaniemi; J Hassi; M Kataja; E Jönsson; L A Laitinen; A R Sovijärvi; B Lundbäck
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 8.082

10.  On-schedule mammography rescreening in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program.

Authors:  Janet Kay Bobo; Jean A Shapiro; Jane Schulman; Charles L Wolters
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.254

View more
  3 in total

1.  Recruitment of African Americans to National Oncology Clinical Trials through a clinical trial shared resource.

Authors:  Debra Wujcik; Steven N Wolff
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2010-02

2.  Timing is everything: methodologic issues locating and recruiting medically underserved women for abnormal mammography follow-up research.

Authors:  Alecia Malin Fair; Debra Wujcik; Jin-Mann S Lin; Kathleen M Egan; Ana M Grau; Wei Zheng
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2008-01-17       Impact factor: 2.226

3.  Lessons learned obtaining informed consent in research with vulnerable populations in community health center settings.

Authors:  Heather E Riden; Kya N Grooms; Cheryl R Clark; Laura R Cohen; Josh Gagne; Dora A Tovar; Mark J Ommerborn; Piper S Orton; Paula A Johnson
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2012-11-07
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.