Literature DB >> 18788984

Mediating factors in the relationship between income and mammography use in low-income insured women.

Alice N Park1, Diana S M Buist, Jasmin A Tiro, Stephen H Taplin.   

Abstract

AIM: We used secondary data from a prospective randomized mammography recruitment trial to examine whether attitudinal and facilitating characteristics mediate the observed relationship between annual household income and mammogram receipt among women in an integrated health plan.
METHODS: We compared 1419 women due for a screening mammogram based on the 1995 annual household income poverty definition for a family of four (<$15,000 vs. >$15,000). A telephone survey was used to collect information on household income, demographics, health behavior, attitudinal and facilitating variables. Administrative databases were used to document mammography receipt. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the hazards ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of subsequent mammography use separately for women with and without a prior mammogram.
RESULTS: Several variables, including employment, living alone, believing that mammograms are unnecessary, having friends supportive of mammography, and ease of arranging transportation, completely mediated the effect of income on mammography use. In multivariable models, the direct predictive effect of income on mammography was reduced to nonsignificance (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.82-1.54 in women with previous mammogram and HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.41-2.00 in women without previous mammogram).
CONCLUSIONS: Providing insurance does not ensure low-income populations will seek screening mammography. Efficacious interventions that address attitudes and facilitating conditions may motivate mammography use among low-income women with insurance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18788984      PMCID: PMC2944414          DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2007.0625

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)        ISSN: 1540-9996            Impact factor:   2.681


  21 in total

1.  The effectiveness of mammography promotion by volunteers in rural communities.

Authors:  M R Andersen; Y Yasui; H Meischke; A Kuniyuki; R Etzioni; N Urban
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 5.043

2.  Testing reminder and motivational telephone calls to increase screening mammography: a randomized study.

Authors:  S H Taplin; W E Barlow; E Ludman; R MacLehos; D M Meyer; D Seger; D Herta; C Chin; S Curry
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Some methodologic lessons learned from cancer screening research.

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Peter A Briss; Jasmin A Tiro; Richard B Warnecke
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2002, featuring population-based trends in cancer treatment.

Authors:  Brenda K Edwards; Martin L Brown; Phyllis A Wingo; Holly L Howe; Elizabeth Ward; Lynn A G Ries; Deborah Schrag; Patricia M Jamison; Ahmedin Jemal; Xiao Cheng Wu; Carol Friedman; Linda Harlan; Joan Warren; Robert N Anderson; Linda W Pickle
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Cross-sectional versus prospective predictors of screening mammography.

Authors:  R Bastani; A E Maxwell; C Bradford
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.

Authors:  R M Baron; D A Kenny
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1986-12

7.  Implementation of outreach telephone counseling to promote mammography participation.

Authors:  E J Ludman; S J Curry; D Meyer; S H Taplin
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  1999-10

8.  Mammography screening: how important is cost as a barrier to use?

Authors:  N Urban; G L Anderson; S Peacock
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years.

Authors:  Diana S M Buist; Peggy L Porter; Constance Lehman; Stephen H Taplin; Emily White
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2004-10-06       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Socioeconomic disparities in breast cancer screening in Hawaii.

Authors:  Timothy Halliday; Deborah A Taira; James Davis; Henry Chan
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2007-09-15       Impact factor: 2.830

View more
  7 in total

1.  Multilevel factors affecting quality: examples from the cancer care continuum.

Authors:  Jane Zapka; Stephen H Taplin; Patricia Ganz; Eva Grunfeld; Katherine Sterba
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-05

2.  Factors associated with delayed patient appraisal of colorectal cancer symptoms.

Authors:  Laura Siminoff; Maria Thomson; Levent Dumenci
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 3.894

3.  A Study on the Knowledge, Perception, and Use of Breast Cancer Screening Methods and Quality of Care Among Women from Central Mexico.

Authors:  Andrea B Cruz-Castillo; María A Hernández-Valero; Shelly R Hovick; Martha Elva Campuzano-González; Miguel Angel Karam-Calderón; L Patricia Bustamante-Montes
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  Cancer Screening Reminders: Addressing the Spectrum of Patient Preferences.

Authors:  Susan D Brandzel; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Arika Wieneke; Susan Carol Bradford; Kilian Kimbel; Hongyuan Gao; Diana Sm Buist
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2017

5.  The influence of travel time on breast cancer characteristics, receipt of primary therapy, and surveillance mammography.

Authors:  Tracy Onega; Andrea Cook; Beth Kirlin; Xun Shi; Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Leah Tuzzio; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-05-07       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Underutilization of Supplemental Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Among Patients at High Breast Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Randy Miles; Fei Wan; Tracy L Onega; Amanda Lenderink-Carpenter; Ellen S O'Meara; Weiwei Zhu; Louise M Henderson; Jennifer S Haas; Deirdre A Hill; Anna N A Tosteson; Karen J Wernli; Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Janie M Lee; Constance D Lehman; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 2.681

7.  Racial/Ethnic Disparities in VA Services Utilization as a Partial Pathway to Mortality Differentials Among Veterans Diagnosed With TBI.

Authors:  Clara E Dismuke; Mulugeta Gebregziabher; Leonard E Egede
Journal:  Glob J Health Sci       Date:  2015-07-19
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.