Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2011
The influence of physicians on colorectal cancer screening behavior.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ho Maria Y, Lai Jennifer Y, Cheung Winson Y
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Our aims were to determine clinical factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and to evaluate the relative role of patient contact with physicians and the quality of these patient-physician interactions in affecting screening.
METHODS: Screening-eligible patients were identified from the Health Information National Trends Survey. Determinants of CRC screening were assessed with logistic regression, and a joint effects model that considered the frequency and quality of contact with physicians was developed to explore their influence on screening.
RESULTS: There were 4,615 respondents of whom only 66% reported receiving CRC screening. Older age, personal history of non-CRC, family history of any cancer, high-income earners, individuals who visited their physicians ≥5 times per year, and those who rated the interactions with their physicians highly were more likely to be screened (all p < 0.05). The joint effects model revealed that quality rather than frequency of physician contact was a stronger predictor of CRC screening, but the odds of screening was highest for those who experienced both frequent and high-quality interactions with their physicians.
CONCLUSIONS: Contact with physicians and the quality of this interaction are associated with screening behavior. Interventions to improve these provider-related factors may promote CRC screening.
METHODS: Screening-eligible patients were identified from the Health Information National Trends Survey. Determinants of CRC screening were assessed with logistic regression, and a joint effects model that considered the frequency and quality of contact with physicians was developed to explore their influence on screening.
RESULTS: There were 4,615 respondents of whom only 66% reported receiving CRC screening. Older age, personal history of non-CRC, family history of any cancer, high-income earners, individuals who visited their physicians ≥5 times per year, and those who rated the interactions with their physicians highly were more likely to be screened (all p < 0.05). The joint effects model revealed that quality rather than frequency of physician contact was a stronger predictor of CRC screening, but the odds of screening was highest for those who experienced both frequent and high-quality interactions with their physicians.
CONCLUSIONS: Contact with physicians and the quality of this interaction are associated with screening behavior. Interventions to improve these provider-related factors may promote CRC screening.