Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26282630›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2015

Adherence to Multiple Cancer Screening Tests among Women Living in Appalachia Ohio.

Mira L Katz, Paul L Reiter, Gregory S Young, Michael L Pennell, Cathy M Tatum, Electra D Paskett

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Cancer Screening in Appalachia: A Common-Sense Approach.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Impact of Continuity of Care on Cervical Cancer Screening: How Visit Pattern Affects Guideline Concordance.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Melanoma Skin Self-Examination Education During Mammography: Health Burden of Women Impairs Implementation.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Cancer-Related Beliefs and Perceptions in Appalachia: Findings from 3 States.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2019
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mira L KatzCollege of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. mira.katz@osumc.edu.
Paul L ReiterCollege of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Gregory S YoungCenter for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Michael L PennellCollege of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Cathy M TatumComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Electra D PaskettCollege of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Ohio Department of Health · USThe Ohio State University · US

Funding

Translational Therapeutics Research Program (TT)P30CA016058 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Jennifer A. Woyach · 1985 to 2026
$132.3M
University of Iowa Clinical and Translational Science Program (TL1)UL1RR025755 · NCRR · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2008 to 2011
$26.3M
The Ohio State University Center for clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR001070 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2013 to 2017
$22.6M
CBPR Strategies to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening in Ohio AppalachiaR24MD002785 · NIMHD · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI PASKETT, ELECTRA D. · 2008 to 2012
$3.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001070NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016058NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR025755NCRR NIH HHS UL1RR025755NIMHD NIH HHS R24 MD002785NIMHD NIH HHS R24MD002785
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a lack of information about the correlates of completing all three cancer screening tests among women living in Appalachia.

methodsCross-sectional telephone interviews were conducted (April-September 2013) among women (n = 637) ages 51 to 75 years from 12 Appalachia Ohio counties. Outcomes of within screening guidelines were verified by medical records. Multivariable logistic regression models identified correlates of being within guidelines for all three cancer screening tests.

resultsScreening rates included mammography (32.1%), Pap test (36.1%), and a colorectal cancer test (30.1%). Only 8.6% of women were within guidelines for all tests. Having had a check-up in the past 2 years and having received a screening recommendation were significantly related to being within guidelines for all three tests (P < 0.01). Participants with higher annual household incomes [$60,000+; OR, 3.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.49-8.33] and conditions requiring regular medical visits (OR, 3.16; 95% CI, 1.29-7.74) were more likely to be within guidelines for all three screening tests.

conclusionLess than 10% of women had completed screening within guidelines for all three screening tests. Regular contact with the health care system and higher incomes were significant predictors of being within guidelines. IMPACT: Within guidelines rates for the three recommended cancer screening tests are low among women in Appalachia Ohio. This finding illustrates the need for innovative interventions to improve rates of multiple cancer screening tests.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAgedAged, 80 and overAppalachian RegionCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansIncidenceMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOhioPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Compliance

Identifiers

PMID26282630
PMCPMC4592467
OpenAlexW2197736971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.