Literature DB >> 21264828

Minimal social network effects evident in cancer screening behavior.

Nancy L Keating1, A James O'Malley, Joanne M Murabito, Kirsten P Smith, Nicholas A Christakis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Social networks may influence screening behaviors. We assessed whether screening for breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer is influenced by the actual screening behaviors of siblings, friends, spouses, and coworkers.
METHODS: We conducted an observational study using Framingham Heart Study data to assess screening for eligible individuals during the late 1990s. We used logistic regression to determine whether the probability of screening for breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer was influenced by the proportion of siblings, friends, and coworkers who had the same screening, as well as spouse's screening for colorectal cancer, adjusting for other factors that might influence screening rates.
RESULTS: Among 1660 women aged 41-70 years, 71.7% reported mammography in the previous year; among 1217 men aged 51-70 years, 43.3% reported prostate-specific antigen testing in the previous year; and among 1426 men and women aged 51-80 years, 46.9% reported stool blood testing and/or sigmoidoscopy in the previous year. An increasing proportion of sisters who had mammography in the previous year was associated with mammography screening in the ego (odds ratio [OR], 1.034; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.000-1.065 for each 10% increase). A spouse with recent screening was associated with more colorectal cancer screening (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.39-1.98 vs unmarried). Otherwise, screening behaviors of siblings, friends, and coworkers were not associated with screening in the ego.
CONCLUSIONS: Aside from a slight increase in breast cancer screening among women whose sisters were screened and colorectal cancer screening if spouses were screened, the screening behavior of siblings, friends, or coworkers did not influence cancer screening behaviors.
Copyright © 2011 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21264828      PMCID: PMC3119780          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25849

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  42 in total

1.  Social networks and cancer screening in four U.S. Hispanic groups.

Authors:  L Suarez; A G Ramirez; R Villarreal; J Marti; A McAlister; G A Talavera; E Trapido; E J Perez-Stable
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 5.043

2.  Longitudinal analysis of large social networks: estimating the effect of health traits on changes in friendship ties.

Authors:  A James O'Malley; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  The spread of alcohol consumption behavior in a large social network.

Authors:  J Niels Rosenquist; Joanne Murabito; James H Fowler; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer.

Authors:  R A Smith; C J Mettlin; K J Davis; H Eyre
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Promoting breast and cervical cancer screening at the workplace: results from the Woman to Woman Study.

Authors:  J D Allen; A M Stoddard; J Mays; G Sorensen
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Costs and cost-effectiveness of a church-based intervention to promote mammography screening.

Authors:  S E Stockdale; E Keeler; N Duan; K P Derose; S A Fox
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Effects of social support, regular physician and health-related attitudes on cervical cancer screening in an Asian population.

Authors:  A Seow; J Huang; P T Straughan
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.506

8.  Women's receptivity to church-based mobile mammography.

Authors:  Kathryn Pitkin Derose; Naihua Duan; Sarah A Fox
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2002-05

9.  Family breast cancer history and mammography: Framingham Offspring Study.

Authors:  J M Murabito; J C Evans; M G Larson; B E Kreger; G L Splansky; K M Freund; M A Moskowitz; P W Wilson
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2001-11-15       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  How underlying patient beliefs can affect physician-patient communication about prostate-specific antigen testing.

Authors:  Michael H Farrell; Margaret Ann Murphy; Carl E Schneider
Journal:  Eff Clin Pract       Date:  2002 May-Jun
View more
  20 in total

1.  Conversations about Abnormal Mammograms on Distress and Timely Follow-up Across Ethnicity.

Authors:  Yamile Molina; Shirley A A Beresford; Tara Hayes Constant; Beti Thompson
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Leveraging geotagged Twitter data to examine neighborhood happiness, diet, and physical activity.

Authors:  Quynh C Nguyen; Suraj Kath; Hsien-Wen Meng; Dapeng Li; Ken Robert Smith; James A VanDerslice; Ming Wen; Feifei Li
Journal:  Appl Geogr       Date:  2016-07-01

3.  Social media indicators of the food environment and state health outcomes.

Authors:  Q C Nguyen; H Meng; D Li; S Kath; M McCullough; D Paul; P Kanokvimankul; T X Nguyen; F Li
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 2.427

Review 4.  Social contagion theory: examining dynamic social networks and human behavior.

Authors:  Nicholas A Christakis; James H Fowler
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  The effect of marriage on utilization of colorectal endoscopy exam in the United States.

Authors:  Jim P Stimpson; Fernando A Wilson; Shinobu Watanabe-Galloway; M Kristen Peek
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  Bringing patients' social context into the examination room: an investigation of the discussion of social influence during contraceptive counseling.

Authors:  Kira Levy; Alexandra M Minnis; Maureen Lahiff; Julie Schmittdiel; Christine Dehlendorf
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2014-12-07

7.  Incident Type 2 Diabetes Risk is Influenced by Obesity and Diabetes in Social Contacts: a Social Network Analysis.

Authors:  Sridharan Raghavan; Mark C Pachucki; Yuchiao Chang; Bianca Porneala; Caroline S Fox; Josée Dupuis; James B Meigs
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Marital status and prostate cancer incidence: a pooled analysis of 12 case-control studies from the PRACTICAL consortium.

Authors:  Charlotte Salmon; Lixin Song; Kenneth Muir; Nora Pashayan; Alison M Dunning; Jyotsna Batra; Suzanne Chambers; Janet L Stanford; Elaine A Ostrander; Jong Y Park; Hui-Yi Lin; Olivier Cussenot; Géraldine Cancel-Tassin; Florence Menegaux; Emilie Cordina-Duverger; Manolis Kogevinas; Javier Llorca; Radka Kaneva; Chavdar Slavov; Azad Razack; Jasmine Lim; Manuela Gago-Dominguez; Jose Esteban Castelao; Zsofia Kote-Jarai; Rosalind A Eeles; Marie-Élise Parent
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2021-07-18       Impact factor: 8.082

9.  Differences between husbands and wives in colonoscopy use: Results from a national sample of married couples.

Authors:  Ashwin A Kotwal; Diane S Lauderdale; Linda J Waite; William Dale
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 4.018

10.  Social networks of health care providers and patients in cardiovascular risk management: a study protocol.

Authors:  Naomi Heijmans; Jan van Lieshout; Michel Wensing
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.