Low-income women with breast abnormalities: System predictors of timely diagnostic resolution

Cancer Control

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 176-182

  Mojica, Cynthia M ^a,b   Bastani, Roshan ^a   Boscardin, W John ^a,b   Ponce, Ninez A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; BIVARIATE ANALYSIS; BREAST DISEASE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DELAYED DIAGNOSIS; DEMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; SOCIAL STATUS;

EID: 34047177945     PISSN: 10732748     EISSN: 15262359     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/107327480701400211     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Facts and Figures 2005. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society; 2005.
2. Hedeen AN, White E. Breast cancer size and stage in Hispanic American women, by birthplace: 1992-1995. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:122-125.
3. Chen F, Trapido EJ, Davis K. Differences in stage at presentation of breast and gynecologic cancers among whites, blacks, and Hispanics. Cancer. 1994;73:2838-2842.
4. Jacobellis J, Cutter G. Mammography screening and differences in stage of disease by race/ethnicity. Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1144-1150.
5. Mandelblatt JS, Yabroff KR. Breast and cervical cancer screening for older women: recommendations and challenges for the 21st century. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2000;55:210-215.
6. White E, Urban N, Taylor V. Mammography utilization, public health impact, and cost-effectiveness in the United States. Annu Rev Public Health. 1993;14:605-633.
7. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet. 1985;1:829-832.
8. Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, et al. Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1982;69:349-355.
9. Fletcher SW, Black W, Harris R, et al. Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:1644-1656.
10. Andersson I, Janzon L. Reduced breast cancer mortality in women under age 50: updated results from the Malmo Mammographic Screening Program. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997:63-67.
11. Richards MA, Westcombe AM, Love SB, et al. Influence of delay on survival in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review. Lancet. 1999;353:1119-1126.
12. Afzelius P, Zedeler K, Sommer H, et al. Patient's and doctor's delay in primary breast cancer. Prognostic implications. Acta Oncol. 1994;33:345-351.
13. Reducing diagnostic delay in breast cancer. Possible therapeutic implications. GIVIO (Interdisciplinary Group for Cancer Care Evaluation) Italy. Cancer. 1986;58:1756-1761.
14. Kerner JF, Yedidia M, Padgett D, et al. Realizing the promise of breast cancer screening: clinical follow-up after abnormal screening among Black women. Prev Med. 2003;37:92-101.
15. Yabroff KR, Washington KS, Leader A, et al. Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results. Med Care Res Rev. 2003;60:294-331.
16. Mandelblatt JS, Yabroff KR, Kerner JF. Equitable access to cancer services: a review of barriers to quality care. Cancer. 1999;86:2378-2390.
17. Bastani R, Yabroff KR, Myers RE, et al. Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening. Cancer. 2004;101:1188-1200.
18. Haas JS, Cook EF, Puopolo AL, et al. Differences in the quality of care for women with an abnormal mammogram or breast complaint. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:321-328.
19. McCarthy BD, Yood MU, Boohaker EA, et al. Inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Am J Prev Med. 1996;12:282-288.
20. Rubino L, French WJ. Re-engineering the Los Angeles County public health care safety net: recommendations from a Blue Ribbon Health Task Force. J Health Hum Serv Adm. 2004;27:56-79.
21. Word DL and Perkins RC. Building a Spanish Surname List for the 1990's - A New Approach to An Old Problem. Population Division Working Paper No. 13. February, 1996.
22. Rubin D. Multiple imputation after 18+ years. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91:473-489.
23. Barnard J, Rubin D. Small-sample degrees of freedom with multiple imputation. Biometrika. 1999;86:948-955.
24. Schootman M, Myers-Geadelmann J, Fuortes L. Factors associated with adequacy of diagnostic workup after abnormal breast cancer screening results. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2000;13:94-100.
25. Aubard Y, Genet D, Eyraud JL, et al. Impact of screening on breast cancer detection. Retrospective comparative study of two periods ten years apart. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2002;23:37-41.
26. McPherson CP, Swenson KK, Jolitz G, et al. Survival of women ages 40-49 years with breast carcinoma according to method of detection. Cancer. 1997;79:1923-1932.
27. Maibenco D, Daoud Y, Phillips E, et al. Relationship between method of detection of breast cancer and stage of disease, method of treatment, and survival in women aged 40 to 49 years. Am Surg. 1999;65:1061-1066.
28. Senie RT, Lesser M, Kinne DW, et al. Method of tumor detection influences disease-free survival of women with breast carcinoma. Cancer. 1994;73:1666-1672.