Literature DB >> 8653644

Cervical cancer screening: are the 1989 recommendations still valid? National Workshop on Screening for Cancer of the Cervix.

E J Parboosingh1, G Anderson, E A Clarke, S Inhaber, E Kaegi, C Mills, Y Mao, L Root, G Stuart, S Stachenko.   

Abstract

Although screening for cervical cancer has been shown to be effective in reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with this disease, and despite many attempts to encourage the development of provincial programs, as of 1995 no province had a comprehensive screening program for cervical cancer. Participants at the Interchange '95 workshop, held in Ottawa in November 1995, reviewed the recommendations of the 1989 National Workshop on Screening for Cancer of the Cervix and identified factors that have impeded their implementation. Participants discussed the need for comprehensive information systems, quality control and strategies to increase recruitment of unscreened and underscreened women. They concluded that the formation of a Cervical Cancer Prevention Network involving key stakeholders will facilitate the development and implementation of provincial programs to ensure optimal screening. They agreed that, in the interim, recommendations for practising physicians should remain as they were following the 1989 workshop.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8653644      PMCID: PMC1487759     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  7 in total

1.  Screening for cancer of the cervix.

Authors:  G C Stuart; G O'Connell; A Ferenczy
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1991-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Report of a National Workshop on Screening for Cancer of the Cervix.

Authors:  A B Miller; G Anderson; J Brisson; J Laidlaw; N Le Pitre; P Malcolmson; P Mirwaldt; G Stuart; W Sullivan
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1991-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Effectiveness of three community based strategies to promote screening for cervical cancer.

Authors:  J E Byles; R W Sanson-Fisher; S Redman; J A Dickinson; S Halpin
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 2.136

4.  European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Cervical Cancer Screening. Europe against cancer programme.

Authors:  D Coleman; N Day; G Douglas; E Farmery; E Lynge; J Philip; N Segnan
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 9.162

5.  Factors associated with cervical cancer screening: results from the Ontario Health Survey.

Authors:  V Goel
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  1994 Mar-Apr

6.  Impact of the Walton report on cervical cancer screening programs in Canada.

Authors:  E Kassirer
Journal:  Can Med Assoc J       Date:  1980-02-23       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 7.  Invasive cancer of the cervix in British Columbia: a review of the demography and screening histories of 437 cases seen from 1985-1988.

Authors:  G H Anderson; J L Benedet; J C Le Riche; J P Matisic; J E Thompson
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 7.661

  7 in total
  8 in total

1.  Factors important in promoting cervical cancer screening among Canadian women: findings from the 1996-97 National Population Health Survey (NPHS).

Authors:  C J Maxwell; C M Bancej; J Snider; S A Vik
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr

Review 2.  The Asian Women's Health Clinic: addressing cultural barriers to preventive health care.

Authors:  L Sent; P Ballem; E Paluck; L Yelland; A M Vogel
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-08-25       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  A Katz
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Online practice guidelines: issues, obstacles, and future prospects.

Authors:  R D Zielstorff
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1998 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Cervical cancer: screening hard-to-reach groups.

Authors:  E Grunfeld
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1997-09-01       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 6.  Pap test results. Responding to Bethesda system reports.

Authors:  T J Colgan
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.275

7.  Patterns and Predictors of Screening for Breast and Cervical Cancer in Women with CKD.

Authors:  Germaine Wong; Jade S Hayward; Eric McArthur; Jonathan C Craig; Danielle M Nash; Stephanie N Dixon; Deborah Zimmerman; Abhijat Kitchlu; Amit X Garg
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2016-12-29       Impact factor: 8.237

8.  Prevalence of selected preventable and treatable diseases among government-assisted refugees: Implications for primary care providers.

Authors:  Kevin Pottie; Praseedha Janakiram; Patricia Topp; Anne McCarthy
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.275

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.