Literature DB >> 7597017

Correlates of mammography among women with low and high socioeconomic resources.

W Rakowski1, D Pearlman, B K Rimer, B Ehrich.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although screening mammography rates have increased, even women with higher incomes and more formal education do not all obtain the exam. This study examined why a modest proportion of higher income/higher education women do not get screened and, conversely, why a small percentage of lower income/lower education women do receive screening.
METHODS: Data were from the 1990 National Health Interview Survey of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. A total of 3,014 women, ages 40-75, were in the sample. Low-resource women had incomes of less than $20,000 and less than a high school diploma. High-resource women had incomes of $30,000 or more and at least some college education.
RESULTS: Correlates of screening status were similar for both resource groups. Recency of Papanicolaou test, recency of clinical breast exam, and regular breast self-examination were associated with higher rates of screening. Four or more persons in a household were associated with lower rates. Among low-resource women, incomes of $10,000-$19,999 were associated with higher likelihood of screening. An income of $50,000 or more was associated with screening among high-resource women.
CONCLUSIONS: The fact that several variables were important for both resource groups suggests that targeted interventions could have benefits across a wide population. Nonetheless, in the high-resource group, 2-year rates never exceeded 80% and repeated screening never exceeded 60%. Rates for low-resource women were over 30% lower. Medical care utilization data did not differ between the two resource groups sufficiently to account for the discrepant rates. Improving screening rates in both resource groups remains a major challenge.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7597017     DOI: 10.1006/pmed.1995.1028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  9 in total

1.  Health insurance and mammography: would a Medicare buy-in take us to universal screening?

Authors:  Donald H Taylor; Lynn Van Scoyoc; Sarah Tropman Hawley
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Racial differences in knowledge, attitudes, and cancer screening practices among a triracial rural population.

Authors:  Electra D Paskett; Cathy Tatum; Julia Rushing; Robert Michielutte; Ronny Bell; Kristie Long Foley; Marisa Bittoni; Stephanie Dickinson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Breast and cervical cancer screening among women in metropolitan areas of the United States by county-level commuting time to work and use of public transportation, 2004 and 2006.

Authors:  Steven S Coughlin; Jessica King
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 3.295

4.  Characteristics associated with mammography screening among both Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women.

Authors:  Evelinn A Borrayo; Lisa Hines; Tim Byers; Betsy Risendal; Martha L Slattery; Carol Sweeney; Kathy B Baumgartner; Anna Giuliano
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  Staging mammography nonadherent women: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Nancy LaPelle; Mary E Costanza; Roger Luckmann; Milagros C Rosal; Mary Jo White; Jennifer Rider Stark
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.771

6.  Sociodemographic gradients in breast and cervical cancer screening in Korea: the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey (KNCSS) 2005-2009.

Authors:  Mi Jin Park; Eun-Cheol Park; Kui Son Choi; Jae Kwan Jun; Hoo-Yeon Lee
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Psychological predictors of attendance at annual breast screening examinations.

Authors:  M V Burton; R Warren; D Price; H Earl
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Trends in Participation Rates for the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea, 2002-2012.

Authors:  Mina Suh; Seolhee Song; Ha Na Cho; Boyoung Park; Jae Kwan Jun; Eunji Choi; Yeol Kim; Kui Son Choi
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 4.679

9.  Strong association between cervical and breast cancer screening behaviour among Danish women; A register-based cohort study.

Authors:  S H Larsen; L F Virgilsen; B K Kristiansen; B Andersen; P Vedsted
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2018-10-27
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.