Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24661503›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2014

A systematic review of special events to promote breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in the United States.

Cam Escoffery, Kirsten C Rodgers, Michelle C Kegler, Regine Haardörfer, David H Howard, Shuting Liang, Erika Pinsker, Katherine B Roland, Jennifer D Allen, Marcia G Ory and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A Systematic Review of Promising Strategies of Faith-Based Cancer Education and Lifestyle Interventions Among Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. The Effects of the Nurse Navigation Program in Promoting Colorectal Cancer Screening Behaviors: a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2020
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Comparing Different Interventions' Effects on Latinas' Screening Mammography Attainment and Participant-Driven Information Diffusion.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Results from an Evaluation of the Georgia Colorectal Cancer Control Program's Community Education and Outreach Events, 2013.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Cam EscofferyDepartment of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, 1518 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA, USA. cescoff@emory.edu.
Kirsten C Rodgers
Michelle C Kegler
Regine Haardörfer
David H Howard
Shuting Liang
Erika Pinsker
Katherine B Roland
Jennifer D Allen
Marcia G Ory
Roshan Bastani
Maria E Fernandez
Betsy C Risendal
Theresa L Byrd
Gloria D Coronado

Funding

EMORY PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERU48DP001909 · DP · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI KEGLER, MICHELLE C · 2009 to 2013
$10.7M
HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERS - CENTER CATEGORY 1U48DP001949 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI TORTOLERO, SUSAN · 2009 to 2013
$7.9M
BUILDING CAPACITY IN RURAL AND UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES: CTR. COMM. HEALTH DEVE. U48DP001924 · DP · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCE CTR · PI MCLEROY, KENNETH R. · 2009 to 2013
$7.6M
ROCKY MOUNTAIN PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERU48DP001938 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER/HSC DENVER · PI MARSHALL, JULIE A · 2009 to 2013
$7.5M
UCLA/RAND PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTERU48DP001934 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI BASTANI, ROSHAN · 2009 to 2013
$5.9M
NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48DP001909NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48DP001924NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001934NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48DP001938NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48DP001949PHS HHS U48D001946
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpecial events are common community-based strategies for health promotion. This paper presents findings from a systematic literature review on the impact of special events to promote breast, cervical or colorectal cancer education and screening.

methodsArticles in English that focused on special events involving breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer conducted in the U.S. and published between January 1990 and December 2011 were identified from seven databases: Ovid, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstract, Cochrane Libraries, and EconLit. Study inclusion and data extraction were independently validated by two researchers.

resultsOf the 20 articles selected for screening out of 1,409, ten articles on special events reported outcome data. Five types of special events were found: health fairs, parties, cultural events, special days, and plays. Many focused on breast cancer only, or in combination with other cancers. Reach ranged from 50-1732 participants. All special events used at least one evidence-based strategy suggested by the Community Guide to Preventive Services, such as small media, one-on-one education, and reducing structural barriers. For cancer screening as an outcome of the events, mammography screening rates ranged from 4.8% to 88%, Pap testing was 3.9%, and clinical breast exams ranged from 9.1% to 100%. For colorectal screening, FOBT ranged from 29.4% to 76%, and sigmoidoscopy was 100% at one event. Outcome measures included intentions to get screened, scheduled appointments, uptake of clinical exams, and participation in cancer screening.

conclusionsSpecial events found in the review varied and used evidence-based strategies. Screening data suggest that some special events can lead to increases in cancer screening, especially if they provide onsite screening services. However, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that special events are effective in increasing cancer screening. The heterogeneity of populations served, event activities, outcome variables assessed, and the reliance on self-report to measure screening limit conclusions. This study highlights the need for further research to determine the effectiveness of special events to increase cancer screening.

Indexed as

Anniversaries and Special EventsEarly Detection of CancerMass ScreeningAdultBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMiddle AgedUnited StatesUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID24661503
PMCPMC3987802

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.