Correction to: Cost-effectiveness of a tailored intervention designed to increase breast cancer screening among a non-adherent population: a randomized controlled trial (BMC Public Health, (2012), 12, 1, (760), 10.1186/1471-2458-12-760);Cost-effectiveness of a tailored intervention designed to increase breast cancer screening among a non-adherent population: A randomized controlled trial

BMC Public Health

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2012, Pages

  Ishikawa, Yoshiki ^a   Hirai, Kei ^b   Saito, Hiroshi ^c   Fukuyoshi, Jun ^d   Yonekura, Akio ^d   Harada, Kazuhiro ^e,f   Seki, Aiko ^b   Shibuya, Daisuke ^g   Nakamura, Yosikazu ^a  

^a JICHI MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b OSAKA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c NATIONAL CANCER CENTER   (Japan)

^d Cancer Scan   (Japan)

^e JAPAN SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF SCIENCE   (Japan)

^f WASEDA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^g MIYAGI CANCER CENTER   (Japan)

Author keywords

Cancer worry; Cost effectiveness; Mammography; Non adherent population; Tailored intervention

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; JAPAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; URBAN POPULATION; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMANS; JAPAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; URBAN POPULATION;

EID: 84865961250     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712458     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09822-y     Document Type: Erratum

References (22)

1. Global cancer statistics. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D, CA Cancer J Clin 2011 61 2 69 90 10.3322/caac.20107 21296855
2. American College of Surgeons, National Cancer Data Base Survival Reports http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/BreastCancer/DetailedGuide/breast-cancer-survival- by-stage
3. World cancer report 2008. Peter B, Bernard L, 2008 http://www.iarc.fr/en/ publications/pdfs-online/wcr/2008/wcr-2008.pdf
4. Repeat mammography: prevalence estimates and considerations for assessment. Clark MA, Rakowski W, Bonacore LB, Ann Behav Med 2003 26 3 201 211 10.1207/S15324796ABM2603-05 14644696 (Pubitemid 37553475)
5. Tailored information about cancer risk and screening: a systematic review. Albada A, Ausems MGEM, Bensing JM, van Dulmen S, Patient Educ Couns 2009 77 2 155 171 10.1016/j.pec.2009.03.005 19376676
6. Tailored interventions to promote mammography screening: a meta-analytic review. Sohl SJ, Moyer A, Prev Med 2007 45 4 252 261 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.06.009 17643481 (Pubitemid 47562532)
7. Understanding how people process health information: a comparison of tailored and nontailored weight-loss materials. Kreuter MW, Bull FC, Clark EM, Oswald DL, Health Psychol 1999 18 5 487 494 10519465 (Pubitemid 29468521)
8. Cost-effectiveness comparison of three tailored interventions to increase mammography screening. Saywell RM, Champion VL, Skinner CS, Menon U, Daggy JA, J Womens Health 2004 13 8 909 918 10.1089/jwh.2004.13.909 (Pubitemid 39545417)
9. The theory of planned behavior. Ajzen I, Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1991 50 5 179 211
10. Targeting breast and cervical cancer screening to elderly poor black women: who will participate? The Harlem Study Team. Mandelblatt J, Traxler M, Lakin P, Kanetsky P, Kao R, Prev Med 1993 22 1 20 33 10.1006/pmed.1993.1002 8475010 (Pubitemid 23056564)
11. A test of an expanded theory of reasoned action to predict mammography participation. Montano DE, Taplin SH, Soc Sci Med 1991 32 6 733 741 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90153-4 2035050
12. Measures and correlates of resilience. Bowen DJ, Morasca AA, Meischke H, Women Health 2003 38 2 65 76 10.1300/J013v38n02-05 14655795 (Pubitemid 37540951)
13. Breast cancer worry and screening: some prospective data. McCaul KD, Schroeder DM, Reid PA, Health psychol 1996 15 6 430 433 8973922 (Pubitemid 126459103)
14. The role of cancer worry in cancer screening: a theoretical and empirical review of the literature. Hay JL, Buckley TR, Ostroff JS, Psycho-Oncology 2005 14 7 517 534 10.1002/pon.864 15490428 (Pubitemid 41025278)
15. Worry and intention among Japanese women: Implications for an audience segmentation strategy to promote mammography adoption. Harada K, Hirai K, Arai H, Ishikawa Y, Fukuyoshi J, Hamashima C, Saito H, Shibuya D, Heal Commun in press
16. Formative research on the feasibility of hygiene interventions for influenzacontrol in UK primary schools. Schmidt WP, Wloch C, Biran A, Curtis V, Mangtani P, BMC Publ Health 2009 9 390 10.1186/1471-2458-9-390
17. Formative research to develop a mass media campaign to increase physicalactivity and nutrition in a multiethnic state. Maddock JE, Silbanuz A, Reger-Nash B, J Health Commun 2008 13 3 208 215 10.1080/10810730701807225 18569354 (Pubitemid 351891562)
18. Formative research on adolescent and adult perceptions of risk factors for breast cancer. Silk KJ, Bigbsy E, Volkman J, Kingsley C, Atkin C, Ferrara M, Goins L-A, Soc Sci Med 2006 63 12 3124 3136 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.08.010 16978750 (Pubitemid 44648504)
19. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Tversky A, Kahneman D, Science 1981 211 4481 453 458 10.1126/science.7455683 7455683 (Pubitemid 11145313)
20. Measurement of the attitude for breast cancer screening. Seki A, Hirai K, Nagatsuka M, Harada K, Arai H, Hazama A, Ishikawa Y, Hamashima C, Saito H, Shibuya D, Kousei-No-Shihyo 2011 58 2 14 22 [in Japanese]
21. Reliability and validity of the modified Perceived Health Competence Scale (PHCS) Japanese version. Togari T, Yamazaki Y, Koide S, Miyata A, Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi 2006 53 1 51 57 [in Japanese] 16502855
22. Cost-effectiveness of a mailed educational reminder to increase colorectal cancer screening. Lee JK, Groessl EJ, Ganiats TG, Ho SB, BMC Gastroenterol 2011 11 93 10.1186/1471-230X-11-93 21867492