Costs and cost-effectiveness of a low-intensity patient-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 25, Issue 33, 2007, Pages 5248-5253

  Shankaran, Veena ^a   McKoy, June M ^a   Dandade, Neal ^a   Nonzee, Narissa ^a   Tigue, Cara A ^a   Bennett, Charles L ^a   Denberg, Tom D ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER SCREENING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE;

EID: 36849005885     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.4098     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts and Figures2007. AmericanCancerSociety,2007.http://www .cancer.org/downloads/STT/ CAFF2007PWSecured.pdf
2. NCCN Practice Guidelines in Oncology. 2007. v.1.2007.http://www.nccn.org/ professionals/physician _gls/PDF/colorectal_screening.pdf
3. Meissner HI, Smith RA, Rimer BK, et al: Promoting cancer screening: Learning from experience. Cancer 101:1107-1117, 2004 (suppl 5)
4. Lynch FL, Whitlock EP, Valanis BG, et al: Cost-effectiveness of a tailored intervention to increase screening in HMO women overdue for Pap test and mammography services. Prev Med 38:403-411, 2004
5. Costanza ME, Stoddard AM, Luckmann R, et al: Promoting mammography: Results of a randomized trial of telephone counseling and a medical practice intervention. Am J Prev Med 19:39-46, 2000
6. Lantz PM, Stencil D, Lippert MT, et al: Implementation issues and costs associated with a proven strategy for increasing breast and cervical cancer screening among low income women. J Public Health Manag Pract 2:54-59, 1996
7. Mohler PJ: Enhancing compliance with screening mammography recommendations: A clinical trial in a primary care office. Fam Med 27:117-121, 1995
8. Saywell RM Jr, Champion VL, Skinner CS, et al: A cost-effectiveness comparison of three tailored interventions to increase mammography screening. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 13:909-918, 2004
9. Brenner AT, Lewis C, Griffith JM, et al: Effectiveness of a mailed intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening in an academic primary care practice: A controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 22:1-276, 2007 (suppl 1)
10. Lairson DR, DiCarlo M, Myers RE, et al: Cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening use. Cancer (in press)
11. Wolf MS, Fitzner KA, Powell EF, et al: Costs and cost effectiveness of a health care providerdirected intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among Veterans. J Clin Oncol 23:8877-8883, 2005
12. Denberg TD, Coombes JM, Byers TE, et al: Effect of a mailed brochure on appointment-keeping for screening colonoscopy: A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 145:895-900, 2006
13. Andersen MR, Urban N, Ramsey S, et al: Examining the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening promotion. Cancer 101:1229-1238, 2004 (suppl 5)
14. Chirikos TN, Christman LK, Hunter S, et al: Cost-effectiveness of an intervention to increase cancer screening in primary care settings. Prev Med 39:230-238, 2004
15. Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, et al: The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. JAMA 276:1172-1177, 1996
16. Roetzheim RG, Christman LK, Jacobsen PB, et al: A randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening among attendees of community health centers. Ann Fam Med 2:294-300, 2004
17. Khankari K: Improving colorectal cancer screening among the medically underserved: A pilot study within a federally qualified health center. J Gen Intern Med 22:1410-1414, 2007