Cervical cancer screening: Knowledge of Pap smear benefits and utilization in Mexico;Tamizaje en cáncer cervical: Conocimiento de la utilidad y uso de citología cervical en México

Revista de Saude Publica

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 100-106

  Aguilar Pérez, José A ^a   Leyva López, Ahidée Gpe ^b   Angulo Nájera, David ^c   Salinas, Antonio ^c   Lazcano Ponce, Eduardo C ^b  

^a Secretaria de Salud de Yucatan   (Mexico)

^b INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE SALUD PÚBLICA   (Mexico)

^c INSTITUTO MEXICANO DEL SEGURO SOCIAL   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Cervix neoplasms; Cross sectional studies; Health plans and programmes; Socioeconomic factors; Vaginal smears; Women's health

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH CONTROL; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SUSCEPTIBILITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; EDUCATION PROGRAM; FAMILY PLANNING; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGICAL EXAMINATION; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH PROMOTION; HEALTH SERVICE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MEXICO; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PATIENT INFORMATION; POPULATION RESEARCH; PUBERTY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUALITY; SOCIOECONOMICS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STUDENT T TEST; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; VAGINITIS;

EID: 12244300956     PISSN: 00348910     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s0034-89102003000100015     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Arillo SE, Lazcano PE, Peris M, Salazar ME, Salmerón CJ, Alonso RP. El conocimiento de profesionales de la salud sobre la prevención del cáncer cervical. Alternativas de educación médica. Salud Pública Mex 2000;42:34-42.
2. Bronfman M, Guiscafré H, Castro R, Gutiérrez G. Medición de la desigualdad: una estrategia metodológica, análisis de las características socioeconómicas de la muestra. Arch Invest Med 1988;19:351-60.
3. Flores E, Mata A. Latino male attitudes and behaviors on their spouses and partners cancer screening behavior: focus groups findings. Monog Natl Cancer Int 1995;18:87-93.
4. Howe SL, Delfino RJ, Taylor TH, Anton CH. The risk of invasive cervical cancer among Hispanics: evidence for targeted preventive interventions. Prev Med 1998;27:674-80.
5. Kendall MG. Multivariate analysis. 2nd ed. London: Charles Griffin; 1980. p. 13-29.
6. Krieger N, Quesenberry Ch, Peng T, Horn RP, Stewart S. Brown S et al. Social class, race/ethnicity, and incidence of breast, cervix, colon, lung, and prostate cancer among Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White residents of the San Francisco Bay Area, 1988-1992 (United States). Cancer Causes Control 1999;10:525-37.
7. Laara E, Day NE, Hakama M. Trends in mortality from cervical cancer in the Nordic countries: association with organised screening programmes. Lancet 1987;1(8544):1247-9.
8. Lazcano PE, Rojas MR. López AM, López CL, Hernández AM. Factores de riesgo reproductivo y cáncer cervico-uterino en la Ciudad de México. Salud Pública Mex 1993;35:65-72.
9. Lazcano PE, Hernández AM, López CL, Alonso de Ruiz P, Torres LA, González LG et al. Factores de riesgo reproductivo e historia de vida sexual asociados a Cáncer cervical en México. Rev Invest Clin 1995;47:377-85.
10. Lazcano PE, Hernández AM, Carrillo LL, Alonso de Ruiz P, Lobatón AT, Lira GG, Romieu I. Factores de riesgo reproductivo e historia de vida sexual asociados a cáncer cervical en México. Rev Invest Clin 1995;47:377-85.
11. Lazcano PE, Najera AP, Buiatti E, Alonso de Ruiz P, Hernández AM. Programa de detección oportuna de cáncer cervical en México. Diagnóstico situacional. Cancerología 1996;42:123-40.
12. Lazcano PE, Nájera AP, Buiatti E, Alonso de Ruiz P, Kuri PC, Hernández AM. The cervical cancer screening program in Mexico: problems with access and coverage. Cancer Causes Control 1997;8:698-704.
13. Lazcano PE, Moss S, Alonso de Ruiz P, Salmerón CJ, Hernández AM. Cervical cancer screening in developing countries: why is it inefecctive? The case of Mexico. Arch Med Res 1999;30:240-50.
14. Lazcano PE, Moss S, Cruz VA, Alonso de Ruiz P, Casares QS, Martínez LC et al. Factores que determinan la participación en el tamizaje de cáncer cervical en el estado de Morelos. Salud Pública Mex 1999;41:278-85.
15. Lazcano PE, Castro R, Allen B, Nájera P, Alonso de Ruiz P, Hernández AM. Resistencias a la utilización del programa de detección oportuna de cáncer de cuello uterino. Cáncer cervicouterino. Diagnóstico, Prevención y Control. México (DF): Editorial Médica Panamericana; 2000.
16. Mandelblatt JS, Gold K, O'Malley AS, Taylor K, Cagney K, Hopkins J et al. Breast and cervix cancer screening among multiethnic women: role of age, health, and source of care. Prev Med 1999;28:418-25.
17. Meneses GF, Lazcano PE, Lino GM, Hernández AM, Lezana FM, Nájera P et al. Prevalencia de uso de la prueba de Papanicolaou en mujeres de 15 a 49 años en México. Cancerología 1996;45:17-23.
18. Muñoz N, Bosch FX. Cervical cancer and human papillomavirus: epidemiological evidence and perspectives for prevention. Salud Pública Mex 1997;39:274-282.
19. Papanicolaou N, Traut HF. The diagnostic value of vaginal smears in carcinoma of the uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1941;42:193.
20. Secretaría de Salud de Mexico. Programa de prevención y control del cáncer cervicouterino. Mexico (DF); 2000.
21. Seow A, Huang J, Tay SP. Effects of social support, regular physician and health-related attitudes on cervical cancer screening in a Asian population. Cancer Causes Control 2000;11:223-30.
22. Stata for Windows. Stata reference manual: release 3.1. 6th ed. College Station Tx: Stata Corporation. sd.