Literature DB >> 18381476

Validity of four self-reported colorectal cancer screening modalities in a general population: differences over time and by intervention assignment.

Resa M Jones1, Steven J Mongin, DeAnn Lazovich, Timothy R Church, Mark W Yeazel.   

Abstract

Little is known about the validity of self-reported colorectal cancer screening. To date, few published studies have validated all four screening modalities per recommended guidelines or included a general population-based sample, and none has assessed validity over time and by intervention condition. To estimate the validity of self-reported screening, a random sample of 200 adults, ages > or =50 years, was selected from those completing annual surveys on screening behavior as part of an intervention study. Approximately 60% of the validation sample authorized medical record review. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for baseline and year 1 follow-up reports for each test and for overall screening adherence. Sensitivity at baseline ranged from 86.9% (flexible sigmoidoscopy) to 100% (colonoscopy). Sensitivity at follow-up was slightly lower. Adjusting for validity measures, the sample overreported screening prevalence at baseline for each of the four modalities. At follow-up, overreporting was greatest for fecal occult blood test (13.0%). Overreporting across intervention conditions was highest for fecal occult blood test (10.8% for control; 24.8% for the most intense intervention) and overall screening adherence (10.9% for control; 14.3% for the most intense intervention). Sensitivity and specificity of self-reported colorectal cancer screening compared with medical records were high; however, adjusting self-reported screening rates based on relative error rates reduced screening prevalence estimates. Those exposed to more intense interventions to modify screening behavior seemed more likely to overestimate their screening rates compared with those who were not exposed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18381476     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0441

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


  35 in total

1.  Is the accuracy of self-reported colorectal cancer screening associated with social desirability?

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Peter N Abotchie; Amy McQueen; Arica White; Jan M Eberth; Sharon P Coan
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Correlates of self-reported colorectal cancer screening accuracy in a multi-specialty medical group practice.

Authors:  Arica White; Sally W Vernon; Jan M Eberth; Jasmin A Tiro; Sharon P Coan; Peter N Abotchie; Anthony Greisinger
Journal:  Open J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-02

3.  Effectiveness of a theory-based intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among Iranian health club members: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Hamideh Salimzadeh; Hassan Eftekhar; Reza Majdzadeh; Ali Montazeri; Alireza Delavari
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2013-09-13

4.  Validation of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behaviors among Appalachian residents.

Authors:  Paul L Reiter; Mira L Katz; Jill M Oliveri; Gregory S Young; Adana A Llanos; Electra D Paskett
Journal:  Public Health Nurs       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 1.462

5.  Examining Adherence With Recommendations for Follow-Up in the Prevention Among Colorectal Cancer Survivors Study.

Authors:  Nikki A Hawkins; Zahava Berkowitz; Juan Rodriguez; Jacqueline W Miller; Susan A Sabatino; Lori A Pollack
Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.172

Review 6.  Health literacy and cancer screening: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benjamin R Oldach; Mira L Katz
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2013-10-14

7.  Validity of self-reported colorectal cancer test use in different racial/ethnic groups.

Authors:  Navkiran K Shokar; Sally W Vernon; Carol A Carlson
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 2.267

8.  Evaluating Lung Cancer Screening Uptake, Outcomes, and Costs in the United States: Challenges With Existing Data and Recommendations for Improvement.

Authors:  Ashish Rai; V Paul Doria-Rose; Gerard A Silvestri; K Robin Yabroff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Multilevel Intervention Raises Latina Participation in Mammography Screening: Findings from ¡Fortaleza Latina!

Authors:  Gloria D Coronado; Shirley A A Beresford; Dale McLerran; Ricardo Jimenez; Donald L Patrick; India Ornelas; Sonia Bishop; John R Scheel; Beti Thompson
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Relationship of colorectal cancer awareness and knowledge with colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Heather M Brandt; Heather R Dolinger; Patricia A Sharpe; James W Hardin; Franklin G Berger
Journal:  Colorectal Cancer       Date:  2012
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.