Randomised trial of prostate cancer screening in the Netherlands: Assessment of acceptance and motives for attendance

Journal of Medical Screening

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 102-106

  Nijs, H G T ^a,b,c   Tordoir, D M R ^a   Schuurman, J H ^a   Kirkels, W J ^c,d   Schroder F H ^c,d  

^a Public Health Service of the Rotterdam Region   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c Department of Social Medical Sciences ^*

^d ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Evaluation studies; Health services research; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER SCINTISCANNING; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MASS SCREENING; PAIN; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PROSTATE CANCER; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 0031395394     PISSN: 09691413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/096914139700400207     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Mandelson MT, Wagner EH, Thompson RS. PSA screening: a public health dilemma. Annu Rev Public Health 1995;16:283-306.
2. Adami H-O, Baron JA, Rothman KJ. Ethics of prostate cancer screening trial. Lancet 1994;442:116-18.
3. Catalona WJ. Screening for prostate cancer. JAMA 1995;273:1174.
4. Chodak GW. Screening for prostate cancer: the debate continues. JAMA 1994;272:813-14.
5. Denis LJ, Murphy GP. Report of the consensus workshop on screen and global strategy for prostate cancer. Cancer 1995;75:1187-207.
6. Reynolds T. Prostate cancer experts debate screening, treatment at workshop. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;85:1104-6.
7. Schröder FH, Denis LJ, Kirkels W, et al. European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. Cancer 1995;76:129-34.
8. Schröder FH, Denis LJ, Kirkels WJ, DeKoning H, Standaert B. European randomised study of screening for prostate cancer, progress report of Antwerp and Rotterdam pilot studies. Cancer 1995;76:129-34.
9. Woolf SH. Screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen. An examination of the evidence. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1401-5.
10. Wilson JMG, Jungner G. Principles and practices of screening for disease. Public Health Paper. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1968;34.
11. Schröder FH, Damhuis RAM, Kirkels WJ, et al. European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer: the Rotterdam pilot studies. Int J Cancer 1996;65:145-51.
12. Boehm S, Coleman-Burns P, Schlenk EA, et al. Prostate cancer in African American men: increasing knowledge and self-efficacy. J Community Health Nurs 1995;12:161-9.
13. Demark-Wahnefried W, Strigo T, Catoe K, et al. Knowledge, beliefs, and prior screening behavior among blacks and whites reporting for prostate cancer screening. Urology 1995;46:346-51.
14. Gustafsson O, Theorell T, Norming U, et al. Psychological reaction in men screened for prostate cancer. Br J Urol 1995;75:631-6.
15. Meyers RE, Wolf TA, Balshem AM, Ross EA, Chodak GW. Receptivity of African-American men to prostate cancer screening. Urology 1994;43:480-7.
16. McCoy CB, Anwyl RS, Metsch LR, et al. Prostate cancer in Florida: knowledge, attitudes, practices, and beliefs. Cancer Pract 1995;3:88-93.
17. McKee JM. Cues to action in prostate cancer screening. Oncol Nurs Forum 1994;21:1171-6.
18. Robinson SB, Ashley M, Haynes MA. Attitudes of African Americans regarding screening for prostate cancer. J Natl Med Assoc 1996;88:241-6.
19. Oesterling JE. Prostate specific antigen: a critical assessment of the most useful tumor marker for adenocarcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1991;145:907-23.
20. Netherlands Health Interview Survey 1981-1991. State Publishing, The Hague, 1992.
21. Kreuger FAF, Nijs HGT, Poel van der MBP. Determinants of attendance and PAP-smear results for the national screening programme for cervical cancer in the area of Rotterdam, 1989-1991 [in Dutch]. Tijdschrift Sociale Gesondheidszorg 1994;72:309-13.
22. Drossaert CHC, Boer H, Seydel ER. National inquiry in (repeat) participation in community screening for breast cancer, interim analysis (I) [in Dutch]. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands, 1994.
23. Knoff Elkind A, Haron D, Eardley A, Spencer B. Reasons for non-attendance from computer aggregated cervical screening: pilot interviews. Soc Sci Med 1988;27:651-60.
24. Murphy M, Goldblatt P, Thornton-Jones H, Silocks P. Survival among women with cancer of the uterine cervix: influence of marital status and social class. J Epidemiol Community Health 1990;44:293-6.
25. Anderson GH, Boyes DA, Benedet JL, et al. Organisation and results of the cervical cytology screening programme in British Columbia, 1955-1985. BMJ 1988;296:975-8.
26. Bastani R, Marcus AC, Maxwell AE, et al. Evaluation of an intervention to increase mammography screening in Los Angeles. Prev Med 1994;23:83-90.
27. Kleinman JC, Kopstein A. Who is being screened for cervical cancer? Am J Publ Health 1981;71:73-6.
28. Magnus K, Langmark F, Andersen A. Mass screening for cervical cancer in Ostfold county of Norway 1959-1977. Int J Cancer 1987;39:311-16.
29. Bosch JL, Hop WCJ, Niemer AQHJ, et al. Parameters of prostate volume and shape in a community based population of men 55 to 74 years old. J Urol 1994;152:1501-5.
30. Annual report 1995. Foundation for Breast Cancer Screening South-West Netherlands [in Dutch]. Comprehensive Cancer Center Rotterdam, 1996.