Literature DB >> 8312021

Preliminary results of a general practice based call system for cervical cancer screening in The Netherlands.

B T Palm1, A C Kant, W J van den Bosch, G P Vooijs, C van Weel.   

Abstract

A study was undertaken in Nijmegen, in the Netherlands, to compare the attendance rate following a call system for cervical cancer screening organized by general practitioners, with the attendance rate resulting from the Dutch national call system. Women are invited for screening on a three yearly basis and in 1990 1616 women were identified by nine practices as being in the appropriate age group (35 to 54 years) to attend for cervical cancer screening while 10,387 women were identified by the national call system. The attendance rate among the 1101 women in the rural general practices was 58%, compared with 49% of 4154 women in the matched group receiving an invitation from the national call system. The attendance rate among the 515 women in the urban general practices was 55%, compared with 41% of 6233 women in the matched group receiving an invitation from the national call system. Invitations from general practitioners resulted in similar percentages of women in all age groups attending for screening. Four general practices sent a reminder letter or made a telephone call to non-attenders. A reminder increased the attendance rate from 58% to 70%. It is concluded that a general practice based call system for cervical screening produces a higher attendance rate than the national call system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8312021      PMCID: PMC1372614     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  21 in total

Review 1.  Screening for cancer of the cervix.

Authors:  N E Day
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Cervical-cancer screening: attendance and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  M A Koopmanschap; G J van Oortmarssen; H M van Agt; M van Ballegooijen; J D Habbema; K T Lubbe
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1990-03-15       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Evaluation of a call programme for cervical cytology screening in women aged 50-60.

Authors:  A J Robertson; G S Reid; C A Stoker; C Bissett; N Waugh; I Fenton; J Rowan; R Halkerston
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-07-15

4.  Screening: the inadequacy of population registers.

Authors:  A Bowling; B Jacobson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-03-04

5.  Implementation of the national cervical cancer screening in general practice and feasibility of a general practice-based call system: the GP's opinion.

Authors:  B T Palm; A C Kant; W J van den Bosch; C W de Beijer; M E Gerrits; C van Weel
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 2.267

6.  Attendance for cervical screening--whose problem?

Authors:  A Eardley; A K Elkind; B Spencer; P Hobbs; L L Pendleton; D Haran
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Uterine sarcoma in Israel: a study of 104 cases.

Authors:  Z Schwartz; R Dgani; M Lancet; I Kessler
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Prospective randomised controlled trial of methods of call and recall for cervical cytology screening.

Authors:  M Pierce; S Lundy; A Palanisamy; S Winning; J King
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-07-15

9.  Effect of organized screening on incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in Denmark.

Authors:  E Lynge; M Madsen; G Engholm
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1989-04-15       Impact factor: 12.701

10.  Effect of population screening for cancer of the uterine cervix in Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Authors:  Y van der Graaf; P J Klinkhamer; G P Vooijs
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 4.018

View more
  3 in total

1.  The pond is wider than you think! Problems encountered when searching family practice literature.

Authors:  W W Rosser; C Starkey; R Shaughnessy
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 2.  Implementing guidelines and innovations in general practice: which interventions are effective?

Authors:  M Wensing; T van der Weijden; R Grol
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Mapping non-response in a prevention program for cardiometabolic diseases in primary care: How to improve participation?

Authors:  Ilse F Badenbroek; Marcus M J Nielen; Monika Hollander; Daphne M Stol; Astrid E Drijkoningen; Roderik A Kraaijenhagen; Niek J de Wit; François G Schellevis
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2020-04-08
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.