Timing of colposcopy after cervical cytologic abnormalities

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 115, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 629-636

  Kuo, Tzy Mey ^a   Benard, Vicki B ^a   Berkman, Nancy D ^a   Martin, Carolyn K ^a   Richardson, Lisa C ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CASE REPORT; COLPOSCOPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; MANAGEMENT; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SQUAMOUS CELL; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; COLPOSCOPY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77649162798     PISSN: 00297844     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181cec0b5     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Gustafsson L, Pontén J, Zack M, Adami HO. International incidence rates of invasive cervical cancer after introduction of cytological screening. Cancer Causes Control 1997;8:755-763 (Pubitemid 27404646)
2. U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999-2005 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute 2009.
3. Leyden WA, Manos MM, Geiger AM, Weinmann S, Moucha-war J, Bischoff K, et al. Cervical cancer in women with comprehensive health care access: attributable factors in the screening process. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:675-683
4. Wright TCJr, CoxJT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ; ASCCP-sponsored Consensus Conference. 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical cyto-logical abnormalities. JAMA 2002;287:2120-2129
5. Yabroff KR, Washington KS, Leader A, Neilson E, Mandelb-latt J. 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.
6. Khanna N, Phillips MD. Adherence to care plan in women with abnormal Papanicolaou smears: a review of barriers and interventions. J Am Board Fam Pract 2001;14:123-130
7. Eggleston KS, Coker AL, Das IP, Cordray ST, Luchok KJ. Understanding barriers for adherence to follow-up care for abnormal pap tests. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2007;16: 311-330
8. Shatin D, Rawson N, Stergachis A. United Health Group. In: Strom B, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. Sussex: John Wiley; 2005. p. 271-280
9. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1958;53:457-481
10. Cox DR. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc B 1972;34:187-220.
11. U.S. Census Bureau. ZIP code tabulation areas (ZCTAs). 2000; Available at: http://www.census.gov/geo/ZCTA/zcta.html. Retrieved April 27, 2009.
12. Kleibaum D, Kupper L, Muller K, Nizam A. Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods. 3rd ed. Pacific Grover (CA): Duxberry Press; 1998.
13. Irwin K, Montapo D, Kasprzyk D, Carlin L, Freeman C, Barnes R, et al. Cervical cancer screening, abnormal cytology management, and counseling practices in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:397-409.
14. Davey DD, Neal MH, Wilbur DC, Colgan TJ, Styer PE, Mody DR. Bethesda 2001 implementation and reporting rates: 2003 practices of participants in the College of American Patholo-gists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004;128:1224-1229
15. National Center for Health Statistics. Classifications of diseases and functioning and disability. Available at: http://www.cdc. gov/nchs/about/ otheract/icd9/abticd9.htm. Retrieved May 6, 2009.
16. Phillips KA, Haas JS, Liang SY, Baker LC, Tye S, Kerlikowske K, et al. Are gatekeeper requirements associated with cancer screening utilization? Health Serv Res 2004;39:153-178
17. Landon BE, Zaslavsky AM, Bernard SL, Cioffi MJ, Cleary PD. Comparison of performance of traditional medicare vs medicare managed care. JAMA 2004;291:1744-1752
18. Waitzman NJ, Smith KR. Separate but lethal: the effects of economic segregation on mortality in metropolitan America. Milbank Q 1998;76:341-73, 304.
19. Lobmayer P, Wilkinson RG. Inequality, residential segregation by income, and mortality in US cities. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:165-166
20. Polednak AP. Trends in US urban black infant mortality, by degree of residential segregation. Am J Public Health 1996;86: 723-726
21. Pickett KE, Ahern JE, Selvin S, Abrams B. Neighborhood socioeconomic status, maternal race and preterm delivery: a case-control study. Ann Epidemiol 2002;12:410-418
22. Prentice JC. Neighborhood effects on primary care access in Los Angeles. Soc Sci Med 2006;62:1291-1303
23. Pickett KE, Wilkinson RG. People like us: ethnic group density effects on health. Ethn Health 2008;13:321-334
24. Coker AL, Eggleston KS, Meyer TE, Luchok K, Das IP. What predicts adherence to follow-up recommendations for abnormal Pap tests among older women? Gynecol Oncol 2007;105: 74-80.
25. Eggleston KS, Coker AL, Luchok KJ, Meyer TE. Adherence to recommendations for follow-up to abnormal Pap tests. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:1332-1341
26. Howell LP, Gurusinghe S, Tabnak F. Impact of ASC-H terminology on the detection of HSILs in medically under-served California women. Diagn Cytopathol 2009; 37:103-110