Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2010
Randomized trial of a lay health advisor and computer intervention to increase mammography screening in African American women.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Russell Kathleen M, Champion Victoria L, Monahan Patrick O, Millon-Underwood Sandra, Zhao Qianqian, Spacey Nicole, Rush Nathan L, Paskett Electra D
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Low-income African American women face numerous barriers to mammography screening. We tested the efficacy of a combined interactive computer program and lay health advisor intervention to increase mammography screening.
METHODS: In this randomized, single blind study, participants were 181 African American female health center patients of ages 41 to 75 years, at < or =250% of poverty level, with no breast cancer history, and with no screening mammogram in the past 15 months. They were assigned to either (a) a low-dose comparison group consisting of a culturally appropriate mammography screening pamphlet or (b) interactive, tailored computer instruction at baseline and four monthly lay health advisor counseling sessions. Self-reported screening data were collected at baseline and 6 months and verified by medical record.
RESULTS: For intent-to-treat analysis of primary outcome (medical record-verified mammography screening, available on all but two participants), the intervention group had increased screening to 51% (45 of 89) compared with 18% (16 of 90) for the comparison group at 6 months. When adjusted for employment status, disability, first-degree relatives with breast cancer, health insurance, and previous breast biopsies, the intervention group was three times more likely (adjusted relative risk, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-3.7; P < 0.0001) to get screened than the low-dose comparison group. Similar results were found for self-reported mammography stage of screening adoption.
CONCLUSIONS: The combined intervention was efficacious in improving mammography screening in low-income African American women, with an unadjusted effect size (relative risk, 2.84) significantly higher (P < 0.05) than that in previous studies of each intervention alone.
METHODS: In this randomized, single blind study, participants were 181 African American female health center patients of ages 41 to 75 years, at < or =250% of poverty level, with no breast cancer history, and with no screening mammogram in the past 15 months. They were assigned to either (a) a low-dose comparison group consisting of a culturally appropriate mammography screening pamphlet or (b) interactive, tailored computer instruction at baseline and four monthly lay health advisor counseling sessions. Self-reported screening data were collected at baseline and 6 months and verified by medical record.
RESULTS: For intent-to-treat analysis of primary outcome (medical record-verified mammography screening, available on all but two participants), the intervention group had increased screening to 51% (45 of 89) compared with 18% (16 of 90) for the comparison group at 6 months. When adjusted for employment status, disability, first-degree relatives with breast cancer, health insurance, and previous breast biopsies, the intervention group was three times more likely (adjusted relative risk, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-3.7; P < 0.0001) to get screened than the low-dose comparison group. Similar results were found for self-reported mammography stage of screening adoption.
CONCLUSIONS: The combined intervention was efficacious in improving mammography screening in low-income African American women, with an unadjusted effect size (relative risk, 2.84) significantly higher (P < 0.05) than that in previous studies of each intervention alone.