OBJECTIVE: The study's objectives were to calculate the costs and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of implementing a health literacy-focused intervention to promote breast and cervical cancer screenings among Korean American women overdue for these tests. METHODS: Researchers estimated the costs of a cluster-randomized controlled trial that evaluated this intervention. Effectiveness was measured as the number of breast or cervical cancer screenings received by women in either the intervention and control arms of the study. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the incremental cost of each additional screening received by the intervention group. RESULTS: Comparing the intervention and control group, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated to be US$236 per screening, without program development costs. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest this program, when compared with others, offered a more cost-effective approach for promoting cancer screening. Local health officials could use this information to guide decisions about reducing cancer disparities among recent immigrant women.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The study's objectives were to calculate the costs and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of implementing a health literacy-focused intervention to promote breast and cervical cancer screenings among Korean American women overdue for these tests. METHODS: Researchers estimated the costs of a cluster-randomized controlled trial that evaluated this intervention. Effectiveness was measured as the number of breast or cervical cancer screenings received by women in either the intervention and control arms of the study. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the incremental cost of each additional screening received by the intervention group. RESULTS: Comparing the intervention and control group, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated to be US$236 per screening, without program development costs. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest this program, when compared with others, offered a more cost-effective approach for promoting cancer screening. Local health officials could use this information to guide decisions about reducing cancer disparities among recent immigrant women.
Authors: Stacy T Lindau; Cecilia Tomori; Tom Lyons; Lizbet Langseth; Charles L Bennett; Patricia Garcia Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Melissa McCracken; Miho Olsen; Moon S Chen; Ahmedin Jemal; Michael Thun; Vilma Cokkinides; Dennis Deapen; Elizabeth Ward Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2007 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Ahmedin Jemal; Edgar P Simard; Christina Dorell; Anne-Michelle Noone; Lauri E Markowitz; Betsy Kohler; Christie Eheman; Mona Saraiya; Priti Bandi; Debbie Saslow; Kathleen A Cronin; Meg Watson; Mark Schiffman; S Jane Henley; Maria J Schymura; Robert N Anderson; David Yankey; Brenda K Edwards Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2013-01-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Giridhar Mohan; Sajal K Chattopadhyay; Donatus U Ekwueme; Susan A Sabatino; Devon L Okasako-Schmucker; Yinan Peng; Shawna L Mercer; Anilkrishna B Thota Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Susan Ahern; Fiona Riordan; Aileen Murphy; John Browne; Patricia M Kearney; Susan M Smith; Sheena M McHugh Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2021-02-10 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Danmeng Huang; David R Lairson; Tong H Chung; Patrick O Monahan; Susan M Rawl; Victoria L Champion Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2021-07-09