ArticleWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health2012
It's the amount of thought that counts: when ambivalence contributes to mammography screening delay.
Article in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01148875 (Finding the M.I.N.C. for Mammography Maintenance), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Finding the M.I.N.C. for Mammography Maintenance
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study examines whether ambivalence toward mammography screening, as moderated by total amount of thought given to the reasons for and against getting mammograms at recommended intervals, predicts greater delay in obtaining subsequent screening mammograms.
methodsA sample of 3,430 insured women with recent (within the last 8-9 months) screening mammograms completed telephone interviews as part of a 5-year intervention study to achieve sustained adherence to annual-interval mammography. Delay was assessed by the number of days between mammograms.
resultsControlling for demographic factors and perceived screening barriers, days between mammograms increased as ambivalence and thought increased. Thought moderated ambivalence: Among women who were most ambivalent, women obtained mammograms 1 month earlier for each unit increase in thought.
conclusionFuture studies should test innovative ways to resolve ambivalence and increase thought about consequences of getting mammograms as a strategy to promote mammography screening adherence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.