Michael D Wirth1, Heather M Brandt2, Heather Dolinger3, James W Hardin4, Patricia A Sharpe5, Jan M Eberth6. 1. Cancer Prevention & Control Program, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Suite 200, Columbia, SC 29208, USA. 2. Cancer Prevention & Control Program, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Suite 200, Columbia, SC 29208, USA ; Department of Health Promotion, Education, & Behavior, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Suite 200 Columbia, SC 29208, USA. 3. Department of Health Promotion, Education, & Behavior, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Suite 200 Columbia, SC 29208, USA ; American Cancer Society, Inc., 128 Stonemark Lane, Columbia, SC, USA. 4. Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Suite 200, Columbia, SC 29208, USA. 5. Prevention Research Center, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street Room 124, Columbia, SC 29208, USA ; Department of Exercise Science, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 921 Assembly Street Room 124, Columbia, SC 29208 USA. 6. Cancer Prevention & Control Program, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Suite 200, Columbia, SC 29208, USA ; Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Suite 200, Columbia, SC 29208, USA.
Abstract
AIM: To compare participation in breast, cervical and prostate cancer screening with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. MATERIALS & METHODS: This random digit-dialed survey includes participants (aged 50-75 years) from South Carolina (USA). Past participation information in fecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, mammography, clinical breast examination, Pap test, prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination was obtained.Adjusted odds ratios are reported. RESULTS: Among European-American women, any cervical or breast cancer screening was associated with adherence to any CRC screening. Among African-American women, mammography was associated with adherence to any CRC screening. Digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests were associated with adherence to any CRC screening test among all men. CONCLUSION: Future research should explore approaches inclusive of cancer screening recommendations for multiple cancer types for reduction of cancer screening disparities.
AIM: To compare participation in breast, cervical and prostate cancer screening with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. MATERIALS & METHODS: This random digit-dialed survey includes participants (aged 50-75 years) from South Carolina (USA). Past participation information in fecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, mammography, clinical breast examination, Pap test, prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination was obtained.Adjusted odds ratios are reported. RESULTS: Among European-American women, any cervical or breast cancer screening was associated with adherence to any CRC screening. Among African-American women, mammography was associated with adherence to any CRC screening. Digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests were associated with adherence to any CRC screening test among all men. CONCLUSION: Future research should explore approaches inclusive of cancer screening recommendations for multiple cancer types for reduction of cancer screening disparities.
Entities:
Keywords:
breast cancer screening; cervical cancer screening; colorectal cancer screening; health disparities; prostate cancer screening
Authors: Ruth C Carlos; A Mark Fendrick; Paul H Abrahamse; Qian Dong; Stephanie K Patterson; Steven J Bernstein Journal: Womens Health Issues Date: 2005 Nov-Dec
Authors: Idris Guessous; Chiranjeev Dash; Pauline Lapin; Mary Doroshenk; Robert A Smith; Carrie N Klabunde Journal: Prev Med Date: 2009-12-16 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Stephanie H Ward; Karen Lin; Brian Meyer; Sarah B Bass; Lalitha Parameswaran; Thomas F Gordon; Sheryl Burt Ruzek Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 2.739
Authors: Dominique G Ruggieri; Sarah Bauerle Bass; Michael J Rovito; Stephanie Ward; Thomas F Gordon; Anuradha Paranjape; Karen Lin; Brian Meyer; Lilitha Parameswaran; Caitlin Wolak; Johnson Britto; Sheryl B Ruzek Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2013-01-23
Authors: Diana S M Buist; Hongyuan Gao; Melissa L Anderson; Tracy Onega; Susan Brandzel; Melissa A Rabelhofer; Susan Carol Bradford; Erin J Aiello Bowles Journal: Prev Med Date: 2017-06-24 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Hitomi Kariya; Diana S M Buist; Melissa L Anderson; John Lin; Hongyuan Gao; Linda K Ko; Rachel L Winer Journal: Prev Med Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Mira L Katz; Paul L Reiter; Gregory S Young; Michael L Pennell; Cathy M Tatum; Electra D Paskett Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Erin J Aiello Bowles; Hongyuan Gao; Susan Brandzel; Susan Carol Bradford; Diana S M Buist Journal: Prev Med Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Deeonna E Farr; Leslie E Cofie; Alison T Brenner; Ronny A Bell; Daniel S Reuland Journal: BMC Womens Health Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 2.742
Authors: Danyell Wilson-Howard; Melissa J Vilaro; Jordan M Neil; Eric J Cooks; Lauren N Griffin; Taylor T Ashley; Fatemeh Tavassoli; Mohan S Zalake; Benjamin C Lok; Folakemi T Odedina; Francois Modave; Peter J Carek; Thomas J George; Janice L Krieger Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2021-12-24
Authors: Colin Malone; Diana S M Buist; Jasmin Tiro; William Barlow; Hongyuan Gao; John Lin; Rachel L Winer Journal: Prev Med Date: 2020-12-31 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Milos Brodak; Julius Orhalmi; Josef Kosina; Michal Balik; Jaroslav Pacovsky Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2015-09-11 Impact factor: 1.195