scholarly journals Major ethnic group differences in breast cancer screening uptake in Scotland are not extinguished by adjustment for indices of geographical residence, area deprivation, long-term illness and education

2012 ◽  
Vol 106 (8) ◽  
pp. 1361-1366 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Bansal ◽  
◽  
R S Bhopal ◽  
M F C Steiner ◽  
D H Brewster
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Ethnic Group ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Area Deprivation ◽  
Screening Uptake ◽  
Ethnic Group Differences ◽  
Major Ethnic Group

scholarly journals Breast cancer screening uptake among women from different ethnic groups in London: a population-based cohort study

BMJ Open ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. e005586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth H Jack ◽  
Henrik Møller ◽  
Tony Robson ◽  
Elizabeth A Davies
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Ethnic Groups ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Population Based ◽  
African Women ◽  
Black African ◽  
Screening Uptake ◽  
Black And White ◽  
Black Caribbean

ObjectiveTo use newly available self-assigned ethnicity information to investigate variation in breast cancer screening uptake for women from the 16 specific ethnic groups within the broad Asian, Black and White groups that previous studies report.SettingNational cancer screening programme services within London.Participants655 516 female residents aged 50–69, invited for screening between March 2006 and December 2009. Ethnicity information was available for 475 478 (72.5%). White British women were the largest group (306 689, 46.8%), followed by Indian (34 687, 5.3%), White Other (30 053, 4.6%), Black Caribbean (25 607, 3.9%), White Irish (17 271, 2.6%), Black African (17 071, 2.6%) and Asian Other (10 579, 1.6%).Outcome measuresUptake for women in different ethnic groups aged 50–52 for a first call invitation to the programme, and for women aged 50–69 for a routine recall invitation after a previous mammography. Uptake is reported (1) for London overall, adjusted using logistic regression, for age at invitation, socioeconomic deprivation and geographical screening area, and (2) for individual areas, adjusted for age and deprivation.ResultsWhite British women attended their first call (67%) and routine recall (78%) invitations most often. Indian women were more likely to attend their first (61%) or routine recall (74%) than Bangladeshi women (43% and 61%, respectively), and Black Caribbean women were more likely than Black African women to attend first call (63% vs 49%, respectively) and routine recall (74% vs 64%, respectively). There was less variation between ethnic groups in some screening areas.ConclusionsBreast cancer screening uptake in London varies by specific ethnic group for first and subsequent invitations, with White British women being more likely to attend. The variation in the uptake for women from the same ethnic groups in different geographical areas suggests that collaboration about the successful engagement of services with different communities could improve uptake for all women.

scholarly journals PS32 Breast Cancer Screening Uptake in Different Ethnic Groups in London

2012 ◽  
Vol 66 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A50.3-A51
Author(s):  
RH Jack ◽  
H Møller ◽  
T Robson ◽  
EA Davies
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Ethnic Groups ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Uptake

scholarly journals A limited review of over diagnosis methods and long-term effects in breast cancer screening

2011 ◽  
pp. 143-147
Author(s):  
Dongfeng Wu ◽  
Adriana Pérez
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Critical Issue ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Probability Modeling

Breast cancer screening programs have been effective in detecting tumors prior to symptoms. Recently, there has been concern over the issue of over-diagnosis, that is, diagnosis of a breast cancer that does not manifest prior to death. Estimates for over-diagnosis vary, ranging from 7 to 52%. This variability may be due partially to issues associated with bias and/or incorrect inferences associated with the lack of probability modeling. A critical issue is how to evaluate the long-term effects due to continued screening. Participants in a periodic screening program can be classified into four mutually exclusive groups depending on whether individuals are diagnosed and whether their symptoms appear prior to death: True-earlydetection; No-early-detection; Over-diagnosis; and Not-sonecessary. All initially superficially healthy people will eventually fall into one of these four categories. This manuscript reviews the major methodologies associated with the over-diagnosis and long-term effects of breast cancer screening.

scholarly journals Breast Cancer Screening, Area Deprivation, and Later-Stage Breast Cancer in Appalachia: Does Geography Matter?

2013 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 546-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger T. Anderson ◽  
Tse-Chang Yang ◽  
Stephen A. Matthews ◽  
Fabian Camacho ◽  
Teresa Kern ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Area Deprivation

Effect of false-positives and women’s characteristics on long-term adherence to breast cancer screening

2011 ◽  
Vol 130 (2) ◽  
pp. 543-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Román ◽  
M. Sala ◽  
M. De La Vega ◽  
C. Natal ◽  
J. Galceran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
False Positives

Breast cancer screening uptake in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer

2000 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bettina Meiser ◽  
Phyllis Butow ◽  
Alexandra Barratt ◽  
Michael Friedlander ◽  
Judy Kirk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Hereditary Breast Cancer ◽  
Screening Uptake ◽  
Increased Risk

scholarly journals Socio-Territorial Inequities in the French National Breast Cancer Screening Programme – A Cross-Sectional Multilevel Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quentin Rollet ◽  
Élodie Guillaume ◽  
Ludivine Launay ◽  
Guy Launoy
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Travel Time ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Programme ◽  
Opportunistic Screening ◽  
Screening Uptake ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening Programme ◽  
National Breast ◽  
Cancer Screening Programme

Abstract Background. France implemented in 2004 the French National Breast Cancer Screening Programme (FNBCSP). Despite national recommendations, this programme coexists with non-negligible opportunistic screening practices.Aim. Analyse socio-territorial inequities in the 2013-2014 FNBCSP campaign in a large sample of the eligible population.Method. Analyses were performed using three-level hierarchical generalized linear model. Level one was a 10% random sample of the eligible population in each département (n = 397 598). For each woman, age and travel time to the nearest accredited radiology centre were computed. These observations were nested within 22 250 IRIS, for which the European Deprivation Index (EDI) is defined. IRIS were nested within 41 départements, for which opportunistic screening rates and gross domestic product based on purchasing power parity were available, deprivation and the number of radiology centres for 100 000 eligible women were computed. Results. Organized screening uptake increased with age (OR1SD = 1.05 [1.04 – 1.06]) and decreased with travel time (OR1SD = 0.94 [0.93 – 0.95]) and EDI (OR1SD = 0.84 [0.83 – 0.85]). Between départements, organized screening uptake decreased with opportunistic screening rate (OR1SD = 0.84 [0.79 – 0.87]) and départements deprivation (OR1SD = 0.91 [0.88 – 0.96]). Association between EDI and organized screening uptake was weaker as opportunistic screening rates and as département deprivation increased. Heterogeneity in FNBCSP participation decreased between IRIS by 36% and between départements by 82%. Conclusion. FNBCSP does not erase socio-territorial inequities. The population the most at risk of dying from BC is thus the less participating. More efforts are needed to improve equity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document