Literature DB >> 8189174

Effect on breast cancer screening response in The Netherlands of inviting women for an additional scientific investigation.

P H Peeters1, C G Beckers, J M Hogervorst, H J Collette.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to determine whether asking women to undertake an additional scientific study would deter them from attending screening for breast cancer.
DESIGN: A randomised study was conducted in all women aged 50-70 years who were eligible for breast cancer screening and living in the city of Utrecht. A total of 1863 women were invited for mammography only and 1863 women were invited to participate in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) in addition to the mammography.
SUBJECTS: The study population comprised a random sample of 3726, 15% of the female population of Utrecht aged 50-70 years. MAIN
RESULTS: The attendance rate for breast cancer screening was 53%, irrespective of the invitation to participate in the additional scientific study.
CONCLUSIONS: Asking women to attend for an investigation in addition to the routine screening procedure for breast cancer did not affect the overall response to screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8189174      PMCID: PMC1059929          DOI: 10.1136/jech.48.2.175

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN: 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


  10 in total

1.  Women's health research expected to remain a priority.

Authors:  B Duane
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1992-12-02       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Screening for breast cancer in Nijmegen. Report of 6 screening rounds, 1975-1986.

Authors:  P H Peeters; A L Verbeek; J H Hendriks; M J van Bon
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1989-02-15       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Reduction of breast cancer mortality through mass screening with modern mammography. First results of the Nijmegen project, 1975-1981.

Authors:  A L Verbeek; J H Hendriks; R Holland; M Mravunac; F Sturmans; N E Day
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1984-06-02       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Evaluation of screening for breast cancer in a non-randomised study (the DOM project) by means of a case-control study.

Authors:  H J Collette; N E Day; J J Rombach; F de Waard
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1984-06-02       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality.

Authors:  S Shapiro; W Venet; P Strax; L Venet; R Roeser
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  The DOM project for the early detection of breast cancer, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Authors:  F de Waard; H J Collette; J J Rombach; E A Baanders-van Halewijn; C Honing
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1984

7.  Breast cancer screening and cost-effectiveness; policy alternatives, quality of life considerations and the possible impact of uncertain factors.

Authors:  H J de Koning; B M van Ineveld; G J van Oortmarssen; J C de Haes; H J Collette; J H Hendriks; P J van der Maas
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1991-10-21       Impact factor: 7.396

8.  Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.

Authors:  L Tabár; C J Fagerberg; A Gad; L Baldetorp; L H Holmberg; O Gröntoft; U Ljungquist; B Lundström; J C Månson; G Eklund
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-04-13       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 9.  Nutrition and cancer: background and rationale of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC).

Authors:  E Riboli
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 32.976

10.  Breast cancer screening programmes: the development of a monitoring and evaluation system.

Authors:  N E Day; D R Williams; K T Khaw
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 7.640

  10 in total
  4 in total

1.  Effect on attendance at breast cancer screening of adding a self administered questionnaire to the usual invitation to breast screening in southern England.

Authors:  E Banks; A Richardson; V Beral; B Crossley; M Simmonds; E Hilton; R English; J Davis; J Austoker
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Prospect-EPIC Utrecht: study design and characteristics of the cohort population. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition.

Authors:  L K Boker; P A van Noord; Y T van der Schouw; N V Koot; H B Bueno de Mesquita; E Riboli; D E Grobbee; P H Peeters
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 8.082

3.  Predicting attendance for breast screening using routinely collected data.

Authors:  Marjon van der Pol; John Cairns
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2003-11

4.  Factors associated with attendance at screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rebecca Mottram; Wendy Lynn Knerr; Daniel Gallacher; Hannah Fraser; Lena Al-Khudairy; Abimbola Ayorinde; Sian Williamson; Chidozie Nduka; Olalekan A Uthman; Samantha Johnson; Alexander Tsertsvadze; Christopher Stinton; Sian Taylor-Phillips; Aileen Clarke
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 2.692

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.