Literature DB >> 9569221

Accuracy of self-report of mammography and Pap smear in a low-income urban population.

P G McGovern1, N Lurie, K L Margolis, J S Slater.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cancer screening history can often be obtained only by self-report, particularly for disadvantaged populations. We examined the accuracy of self-report of mammography and Pap smear for an urban, low-income population.
METHODS: Women attending non-primary care clinics (mostly surgery and orthopedics) at a large public teaching hospital in Minneapolis between July 1992 and May 1993 were queried about their screening history (n = 477). The women were interviewed by a trained peer-recruiter and asked whether they had ever heard of a Pap smear or mammogram, whether they had ever had one, where it was done, and when the last one was. We verified self-report by checking medical records where the test was performed.
RESULTS: The positive and negative predictive value of recall of mammography in the previous year was 72.4% and 90.6%, respectively. The figures for Pap smear recall were somewhat lower, 65.5% and 85.9%, respectively. We found a record of a mammogram in 88% of women able to recall the year. Of these, slightly over two-thirds recalled their mammogram in the same year as their record indicated. Inaccurate recalls were more commonly of the "telescoping" type, i.e., tests were recalled as having occurred more recently than was the case. Recall was substantially better for recent tests. Results for Pap smear recalls were broadly similar.
CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of self-report of mammography and Pap smear is relatively poor for medical practice but is acceptable in population surveys with appropriate correction for overreporting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9569221     DOI: 10.1016/s0749-3797(97)00076-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Prev Med        ISSN: 0749-3797            Impact factor:   5.043


  63 in total

1.  Increasing use of mammography among older, rural African American women: results from a community trial.

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

Review 2.  Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening.

Authors:  Roshan Bastani; K Robin Yabroff; Ronald E Myers; Beth Glenn
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Randomized trial of an intervention to improve mammography utilization among a triracial rural population of women.

Authors:  Electra Paskett; Cathy Tatum; Julia Rushing; Robert Michielutte; Ronny Bell; Kristie Long Foley; Marisa Bittoni; Stephanie L Dickinson; Ann Scheck McAlearney; Katherine Reeves
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Correlates of breast cancer screening among Asian Americans enrolled in ENCOREplus.

Authors:  Cindy A Leong-Wu; Maria E Fernandez
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2006-07

5.  Bias associated with self-report of prior screening mammography.

Authors:  Kathleen A Cronin; Diana L Miglioretti; Martin Krapcho; Binbing Yu; Berta M Geller; Patricia A Carney; Tracy Onega; Eric J Feuer; Nancy Breen; Rachel Ballard-Barbash
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Trust in the health care system and the use of preventive health services by older black and white adults.

Authors:  Donald Musa; Richard Schulz; Roderick Harris; Myrna Silverman; Stephen B Thomas
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  A source of error in self-reports of pap test utilization.

Authors:  Judith Pizarro; Tamera R Schneider; Peter Salovey
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2002-10

8.  Self-report versus medical records for assessing cancer-preventive services delivery.

Authors:  Jeanne M Ferrante; Pamela Ohman-Strickland; Karissa A Hahn; Shawna V Hudson; Eric K Shaw; Jesse C Crosson; Benjamin F Crabtree
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 9.  The association of obesity and cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nisa M Maruthur; Shari D Bolen; Frederick L Brancati; Jeanne M Clark
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2008-11-06       Impact factor: 5.002

10.  Social and Structural Determinants of Cervical Health among Women Engaged in HIV Care.

Authors:  Shalanda A Bynum; Lisa T Wigfall; Heather M Brandt; Carmen Hampton Julious; Saundra H Glover; James R Hébert
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2016-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.