Literature DB >> 30461529

Accuracy of Self-reported Abnormal Pap Smears Among Reproductive-age African-American Women.

Kristen R Moore1, Donna D Baird.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Self-reported history of abnormal Pap smear is used in large public health surveys. However, literature on the accuracy of this reporting is limited. We sought to assess the validity of self-reported abnormal Pap history in a community-based sample of African-American women 24-37 years of age in the Detroit, MI, recruited from 2010 to 2012.
METHODS: We compared self-reported data on 2-year history of abnormal Pap smear to medical Pap record data (the gold standard) obtained from eligible participants. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated to summarize the accuracy of the self-reported data. We also explored the sensitivity by severity of abnormality.
RESULTS: We identified 345 participants with 480 eligible Pap records. Thirty-five percent of abnormal Pap results were not identified by self-report (sensitivity/specificity: 65%/91%; kappa = 0.54). The sensitivity of reporting an abnormal Pap tended to be higher for those with a more severe abnormality.
CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of abnormal Pap smears were not identified by self-report in this sample of African-American women. Public health studies utilizing self-reported abnormal Pap information should be interpreted with caution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30461529      PMCID: PMC6363825          DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000947

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiology        ISSN: 1044-3983            Impact factor:   4.822


  10 in total

1.  The agreement between self-reported cervical smear abnormalities and screening programme records.

Authors:  Karen Canfell; Valerie Beral; Jane Green; Rebecca Cameron; Krys Baker; Anna Brown
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 2.  Race and the validity of self-reported cancer screening behaviors: development of a conceptual model.

Authors:  Diana J Burgess; Adam A Powell; Joan M Griffin; Melissa R Partin
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2008-12-11       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 3.  Accuracy of self-reports of Pap and mammography screening compared to medical record: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michelle Howard; Gina Agarwal; Alice Lytwyn
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2008-09-19       Impact factor: 2.506

4.  Validation of recall of breast and cervical cancer screening by women in an ethnically diverse population.

Authors:  Stephen J McPhee; Tung T Nguyen; Sarah J Shema; Bang Nguyen; Carol Somkin; Phuong Vo; Rena Pasick
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Accuracy of patients' recall of Pap and cholesterol screening.

Authors:  S Newell; A Girgis; R Sanson-Fisher; M Ireland
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Validity of adolescent and young adult self-report of Papanicolaou smear results.

Authors:  J A Kahn; E Goodman; R A Kaplowitz; G B Slap; S J Emans
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Adolescent girls' understanding of Papanicolaou smear results.

Authors:  F M Biro; S L Rosenthal; L Rymarquis; L M Kollar; P J Hillard
Journal:  J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 1.814

8.  Cancer statistics for African Americans, 2013.

Authors:  Carol DeSantis; Deepa Naishadham; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 508.702

9.  A Prospective, Ultrasound-Based Study to Evaluate Risk Factors for Uterine Fibroid Incidence and Growth: Methods and Results of Recruitment.

Authors:  Donna D Baird; Quaker E Harmon; Kristen Upson; Kristen R Moore; Christie Barker-Cummings; Susan Baker; Tracy Cooper; Ganesa Wegienka
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 2.681

10.  Agreement between patient self-reports and medical records for Pap smear histories.

Authors:  M T McKenna; M Speers; K Mallin; R Warnecke
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1992 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.043

  10 in total
  1 in total

1.  A prospective study of treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and fecundability.

Authors:  Lauren A Wise; Sydney K Willis; Rebecca B Perkins; Amelia K Wesselink; Alexandra Klann; Holly M Crowe; Kristen A Hahn; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Elizabeth E Hatch
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-12-28       Impact factor: 8.661

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.