Literature DB >> 24027657

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

Arica White1, Sally W Vernon, Jan M Eberth, Jasmin A Tiro, Sharon P Coan, Peter N Abotchie, Anthony Greisinger.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We assessed whether accuracy of self-reported screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) varied by respondent characteristics or healthcare utilization.
METHODS: From 2005 to 2007, 857 respondents aged 51 - 74 were recruited from a multi-specialty medical group practice to answer a questionnaire about their CRC screening (CRCS) behaviors. Self-reports were compared with administrative and medical records to assess concordance, sensitivity, specificity, and report-to-records ratios for overall CRCS (fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy, and/or colonoscopy).
RESULTS: Concordance was good (≥0.8 to <0.9) or fair (≥0.7 to <0.8) for most subgroups; respondents with >5 visits outside the clinic had poor (<0.7) concordance. Sensitivity estimates were mostly excellent (≥0.9) or good but poor for respondents whose healthcare provider did not advise a specific CRCS test. Specificity was poor for the following respondents: 65+ years, males, college graduates, family history of CRC, >5 visits outside of the clinic, or whose healthcare provider advised a specific CRCS test. Respondents 65+ years and with >5 outside visits over-reported CRCS.
CONCLUSIONS: With few exceptions, self-reports of CRCS in an insured population is reasonably accurate across subgroups. More work is needed to replicate these findings in diverse settings and populations to better understand subgroup differences and improve measures of CRCS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Accuracy; Colorectal Cancer; Correlates; Screening; Self-Report

Year:  2013        PMID: 24027657      PMCID: PMC3767154          DOI: 10.4236/ojepi.2013.31004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Open J Epidemiol        ISSN: 2165-7459


  20 in total

1.  Comparison of self-reported fecal occult blood testing with automated laboratory records among older women in a health maintenance organization.

Authors:  M T Mandelson; A Z LaCroix; L A Anderson; M R Nadel; N C Lee
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1999-09-15       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 2.  The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) privacy rule: implications for clinical research.

Authors:  Rachel Nosowsky; Thomas J Giordano
Journal:  Annu Rev Med       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 13.739

3.  What is the concordance between the medical record and patient self-report as data sources for ambulatory care?

Authors:  Diana M Tisnado; John L Adams; Honghu Liu; Cheryl L Damberg; Wen-Pin Chen; Fang Ashlee Hu; David M Carlisle; Carol M Mangione; Katherine L Kahn
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Evaluation of claims, medical records, and self-report for measuring fecal occult blood testing among medicare enrollees in fee for service.

Authors:  Anna P Schenck; Carrie N Klabunde; Joan L Warren; Sharon Peacock; William W Davis; Sarah T Hawley; Michael Pignone; David F Ransohoff
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 4.254

5.  Validation of self-reported colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in a study of ethnically diverse first-degree relatives of CRC cases.

Authors:  Roshan Bastani; Beth A Glenn; Annette E Maxwell; Patricia A Ganz; Cynthia M Mojica; L Cindy Chang
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  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

7.  Trends in colorectal cancer test use among vulnerable populations in the United States.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Kathleen A Cronin; Nancy Breen; William R Waldron; Anita H Ambs; Marion R Nadel
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2011-06-08       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Validity of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behavior.

Authors:  M Baier; N Calonge; G Cutter; M McClatchey; S Schoentgen; S Hines; A Marcus; D Ahnen
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Reliability and validity of a questionnaire to measure colorectal cancer screening behaviors: does mode of survey administration matter?

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Jasmin A Tiro; Rachel W Vojvodic; Sharon Coan; Pamela M Diamond; Anthony Greisinger; Maria E Fernandez
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Testing for prostate and colorectal cancer: comparison of self-report and medical record audit.

Authors:  H Irene Hall; Stephen K Van Den Eeden; Dennis D Tolsma; Kate Rardin; Trevor Thompson; Amber Hughes Sinclair; Diane J Madlon-Kay; Marion Nadel
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.018

View more
  5 in total

1.  Recent trends in breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening test utilization in Canada, using self-reported data from 2008 and 2012.

Authors:  D Major; D Armstrong; H Bryant; W Cheung; K Decker; G Doyle; V Mai; C M McLachlin; J Niu; J Payne; N Shukla
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Differences in colorectal cancer screening rates across income strata by levels of urbanization: results from the Canadian Community Health Survey (2013/2014).

Authors:  Jonathan Simkin; Gina Ogilvie; Brendan Hanley; Catherine Elliott
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2018-10-23

3.  Physician counseling on colorectal cancer screening and receipt of screening among Latino patients.

Authors:  Anna M Nápoles; Jasmine Santoyo-Olsson; Anita L Stewart; Jill Olmstead; Steven E Gregorich; Georgianna Farren; Ruben Cabral; Andrew Freudman; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Screening for colorectal cancer: using data to set prevention priorities.

Authors:  Graham A Colditz; Lucy D'Agostino McGowan; Aimee S James; Kari Bohlke; Melody S Goodman
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 2.506

5.  Screening for Colorectal Cancer in the United States: Correlates and Time Trends by Type of Test.

Authors:  Jean A Shapiro; Ashwini V Soman; Zahava Berkowitz; Stacey A Fedewa; Susan A Sabatino; Janet S de Moor; Tainya C Clarke; V Paul Doria-Rose; Erica S Breslau; Ahmedin Jemal; Marion R Nadel
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 4.090

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.