Literature DB >> 22466249

Increasing screening mammography among immigrant and minority women in Canada: a review of past interventions.

Nour Schoueri-Mychasiw1, Sharon Campbell, Verna Mai.   

Abstract

Screening mammograms are important to detect breast cancer at earlier and more treatable stages. Immigrant and minority women report low participation rates due to barriers related to cultural beliefs and norms, privacy/modesty, and language. This review examines whether screening mammogram interventions in Canada and other countries with comparable health-care systems have addressed the needs of these women. Our systematic literature search identified studies that focused on increasing screening mammogram participation among immigrant and/or minority women. We used the Health Belief Model and the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model to guide our critical synthesis of the reviewed interventions and the recommendations for the future. Eight studies met the search criteria. Overall, interventions showed some increase in mammogram participation rates. The barriers targeted were relatively similar across studies and there was a focus on increasing cues to screening. This review illustrates that it is essential to develop and implement programs to overcome the unique barriers to screening mammography if we are to increase participation among immigrants and minority women. We suggest other potentially effective health promotion strategies as a starting point for discussion and future research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 22466249     DOI: 10.1007/s10903-012-9612-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health        ISSN: 1557-1912


  53 in total

Review 1.  Breast screening and ethnic minority women: a literature review.

Authors:  H Raja-Jones
Journal:  Br J Nurs       Date:  1999 Oct 28-Nov 10

2.  Interventions to improve uptake of breast screening in inner city Cardiff general practices with ethnic minority lists.

Authors:  T S Bell; L K Branston; R G Newcombe; G R Barton
Journal:  Ethn Health       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.772

3.  Mammography screening participation: effects of a media campaign targeting Italian-speaking women.

Authors:  Andrew Page; Stephen Morrell; Richard Tewson; Richard Taylor; Ann Brassil
Journal:  Aust N Z J Public Health       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.939

4.  Veiled yet vulnerable. Breast cancer screening and the Muslim way of life.

Authors:  S M Underwood; L Shaikha; D Bakr
Journal:  Cancer Pract       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec

5.  Health belief model variables as predictors of progression in stage of mammography adoption.

Authors:  Usha Menon; Victoria Champion; Patrick O Monahan; Joanne Daggy; Siu Hui; Celette Sugg Skinner
Journal:  Am J Health Promot       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr

6.  Improving uptake of breast screening in multiethnic populations: a randomised controlled trial using practice reception staff to contact non-attenders.

Authors:  J Atri; M Falshaw; R Gregg; J Robson; R Z Omar; S Dixon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-11-22

7.  Beliefs related to breast health practices: the perceptions of South Asian women living in Canada.

Authors:  J L Bottorff; J L Johnson; R Bhagat; S Grewal; L G Balneaves; H Clarke; B A Hilton
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Immigrant women's health.

Authors:  L M Meadows; W E Thurston; C Melton
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  The effects of culture on illness behavior and medical care. Asian and American differences.

Authors:  T Nilchaikovit; J M Hill; J C Holland
Journal:  Gen Hosp Psychiatry       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 3.238

10.  Women who decline breast screening.

Authors:  U Maclean; D Sinfield; S Klein; B Harnden
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 3.710

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Interventions to reach underscreened populations: a narrative review for planning cancer screening initiatives.

Authors:  Mavis Jones; Brenda Ross; Alyssa Cloth; Laura Heller
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 3.380

2.  Afrocentric screening program for breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer among immigrant patients in Ontario.

Authors:  Onye Nnorom; Antonia Sappong-Kumankumah; Oluwatobi R Olaiya; Mervin Burnett; Nancy Akor; Nan Shi; Patricia Wright; Abel Gebreyesus; Liben Gebremikael; Aisha Lofters
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Interventional Education Methods for Increasing Women's Participation in Breast Cancer Screening Program.

Authors:  Memnun Seven; Aygül Akyüz; Lyn B Robertson
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  Cancer Screening among immigrants living in urban and regional Australia: results from the 45 and up study.

Authors:  Marianne F Weber; May Chiew; Eleonora Feletto; Clare Kahn; Freddy Sitas; Lucy Webster
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Breast cancer screening disparities among immigrant women by world region of origin: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Mandana Vahabi; Aisha Lofters; Matthew Kumar; Richard H Glazier
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 4.452

6.  Breast Cancer Screening Practices and Related Health Beliefs among Taiwanese Nurses.

Authors:  Tsu-Yin Wu; Shu-Ling Chen
Journal:  Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

7.  Barriers to and discourses about breast cancer prevention among immigrant women in Spain: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Sebastià March; Barbara Villalonga; Carmen Sanchez-Contador; Clara Vidal; Aina Mascaro; Maria de Lluc Bennasar; Magdalena Esteva
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-11-18       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Gender, letters, relatives, and God: mediating actors in mammographic screening among Pakistani women in Norway.

Authors:  Sameer Bhargava; Solveig Hofvind; Kåre Moen
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2019-09-11
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.