INTRODUCTION: We evaluated an intervention program for Mexican-American women to increase Pap smear and mammography screening. METHODS: The three-year intervention included the presentation of role models in the media and reinforcement by peer volunteers. We used a two-community (intervention and comparison) pre-post test design. Activities were targeted to a mainly Spanish-speaking, poverty-level, immigrant population. Pre- and postintervention screening rates were based on independent random samples of Mexican-American women 40 years and older. RESULTS: Women reported a 6% absolute increase in Pap smear use similar to the 7% increase in the comparison community. Both communities experienced large but similar increases in recent mammography use (17% and 19%). Adjusting for differences in demographic factors, intervention and comparison changes remained identical. CONCLUSIONS: Our peer intervention failed to accelerate the secular trend in cancer screening low-income Mexican-American women. Likely, promotional activities were too diffuse and the comparison community was contaminated with similar interventions. Strong social and market forces make it difficult to measure the effect of a specialized intervention on cancer screening rates.
INTRODUCTION: We evaluated an intervention program for Mexican-American women to increase Pap smear and mammography screening. METHODS: The three-year intervention included the presentation of role models in the media and reinforcement by peer volunteers. We used a two-community (intervention and comparison) pre-post test design. Activities were targeted to a mainly Spanish-speaking, poverty-level, immigrant population. Pre- and postintervention screening rates were based on independent random samples of Mexican-American women 40 years and older. RESULTS:Women reported a 6% absolute increase in Pap smear use similar to the 7% increase in the comparison community. Both communities experienced large but similar increases in recent mammography use (17% and 19%). Adjusting for differences in demographic factors, intervention and comparison changes remained identical. CONCLUSIONS: Our peer intervention failed to accelerate the secular trend in cancer screening low-income Mexican-American women. Likely, promotional activities were too diffuse and the comparison community was contaminated with similar interventions. Strong social and market forces make it difficult to measure the effect of a specialized intervention on cancer screening rates.
Authors: Jo Anne Earp; Eugenia Eng; Michael S O'Malley; Mary Altpeter; Garth Rauscher; Linda Mayne; Holly F Mathews; Kathy S Lynch; Bahjat Qaqish Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: John S Luque; Yelena N Tarasenko; Claudia Reyes-Garcia; Moya L Alfonso; Norma Suazo; Laura Rebing; Daron G Ferris Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Victoria M Taylor; Tung T Nguyen; J Carey Jackson; Stephen J McPhee Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.254