ArticlePreventive medicine reports2015
Cancer screening among a population-based sample of insured women.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Face-to-Face and WhatsApp Communication of a Theory-Based Health Education Intervention on Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy (SeBF Intervention): Cluster Randomized Controlled Field Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Trial
- The Effects of Theory-Based Educational Intervention and WhatsApp Follow-up on Papanicolaou Smear Uptake Among Postnatal Women in Malaysia: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Trial
- Patient and physician characteristics affect adherence to screening mammography: A population-based cohort study.PloS one · 2018Trial
- Utilization and Cost of Mammography Screening Among Commercially Insured Women 50 to 64 Years of Age in the United States, 2012-2016.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2020Article
- Socio-cognitive determinants of colorectal cancer screening uptake: An application of intervention mapping approach.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2019Article
- Breast cancer epidemic in the early twenty-first century: evaluation of risk factors, cumulative questionnaires and recommendations for preventive measures.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016Review
- Screening mammography uptake within Australia and Scotland in rural and urban populations.Preventive medicine reports · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeScreening has been shown to lower the morbidity and mortality for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. Despite the availability of cancer screening, nearly 70,000 women die each year from these cancers. We conducted a study in 2008 within a privately-insured patient population of women who were members of an integrated health care system in Southeastern Michigan, for whom information on ovarian cancer risk as well as personal and family history of cancer was available.
methodsWe used a population-based, weighted stratified random sample of women from a single health care institution to assess the proportion with up-to-date breast, cervical, and colorectal screening. Multivariable analyses were conducted to identify predictors of screening behavior.
resultsIn our study, women reported cervical and breast cancer screening above 90% and colorectal cancer screening above 75%.
conclusionsThe results of our study hold promise that Healthy People 2020 cancer screening objectives might be obtainable as access to health insurance is expanded among US residents.
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.