Interventions to Promote Repeat Breast Cancer Screening With Mammography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:42
|
作者
Vernon, Sally W. [1 ]
McQueen, Amy [2 ]
Tiro, Jasmin A. [3 ]
del Junco, Deborah J. [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Sch Publ Hlth, Ctr Hlth Promot & Prevent Res, Div Hlth Promot & Behav Sci, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Dept Med, Div Hlth Behav Res, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[3] Univ Texas SW Med Ctr Dallas, Dept Clin Sci, Div Behav & Commun Sci, Dallas, TX 75390 USA
[4] Univ Texas Med Sch, Dept Surg & Pediat, Houston, TX USA
[5] Univ Texas Sch Publ Hlth, Div Epidemiol Human Genet & Environm Sci, Houston, TX USA
来源
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
CLIENT-DIRECTED INTERVENTIONS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; TAILORED INTERVENTIONS; PATIENT REMINDERS; COLORECTAL-CANCER; HEALTH BELIEF; WOMEN; CARE; ADHERENCE; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1093/jnci/djq223
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Various interventions to promote repeat use of mammography have been evaluated, but the efficacy of such interventions is not well understood. We searched electronic databases through August 15, 2009, and extracted data to calculate unadjusted effect estimates (odds ratios [ORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]). Eligible studies were those that reported estimates of repeat screening for intervention and control groups. We tested homogeneity and computed summary odds ratios. To explore possible causes of heterogeneity, we performed stratified analyses, examined meta-regression models for 15 a priori explanatory variables, and conducted influence analyses. We used funnel plots and asymmetry tests to assess publication bias. Statistical tests were two-sided. The 25 eligible studies (27 effect estimates) were statistically significantly heterogeneous (Q = 69.5, I (2) = 63%, P < .001). Although there were homogeneous subgroups in some categories of the 15 explanatory variables, heterogeneity persisted after stratification. For all but one explanatory variable, subgroup summary odds ratios were similar with overlapping confidence intervals. The summary odds ratio for the eight heterogeneous reminder-only studies was the largest observed (OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.41 to 2.29) and was statistically significantly greater than the summary odds ratio (P-diff = .008) for the homogeneous group of 17 studies that used the more intensive strategies of education/motivation or counseling (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.37). However, reminder-only studies remained statistically significantly heterogeneous, whereas the studies classified as education/motivation or counseling were homogeneous. Similarly, in meta-regression modeling, the only statistically significant predictor of the intervention effect size was intervention strategy (reminder-only vs the other two combined as the referent). Publication bias was not apparent. The observed heterogeneity precludes a summary effect estimate. We also cannot conclude that reminder-only intervention strategies are more effective than alternate strategies. Additional studies are needed to identify methods or strategies that could increase repeat mammography.
引用
收藏
页码:1023 / 1039
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Electronic Health Interventions and Cervical Cancer Screening:Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Liu, Xiaoxia
    Ning, Lianzhen
    Fan, Wenqi
    Jia, Chanyi
    Ge, Lina
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2024, 26
  • [22] Interventions for cancer screening among Chinese Americans: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Lei, Fang
    Zheng, Ying
    Lee, Eunice
    PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (03):
  • [23] Tailored interventions to promote mammography screening: A meta-analytic review
    Sohl, Stephanie J.
    Moyer, Anne
    PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2007, 45 (04) : 252 - 261
  • [24] Interval breast cancer rates for tomosynthesis vs mammography population screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies
    Libesman, Sol
    Li, Tong
    Marinovich, M. Luke
    Seidler, Anna Lene
    Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano
    Houssami, Nehmat
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2025, 35 (03) : 1478 - 1489
  • [25] Effectiveness of the Theory-Based Educational Interventions on Screening of Breast Cancer in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Bashirian, Saeed
    Mohammadi, Younes
    Barati, Majid
    Moaddabshoar, Leila
    Dogonchi, Mitra
    INTERNATIONAL QUARTERLY OF COMMUNITY HEALTH EDUCATION, 2020, 40 (03) : 219 - 236
  • [26] Existential Interventions in Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Vos, Joel
    Craig, Meghan
    Cooper, Mick
    PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2013, 22 : 73 - 74
  • [27] Digital interventions to promote psychological resilience: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Sarah K. Schäfer
    Lisa von Boros
    Lea M. Schaubruch
    Angela M. Kunzler
    Saskia Lindner
    Friederike Koehler
    Tabea Werner
    Federico Zappalà
    Isabella Helmreich
    Michèle Wessa
    Klaus Lieb
    Oliver Tüscher
    npj Digital Medicine, 7
  • [28] Digital interventions to promote psychological resilience: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Schaefer, Sarah K.
    von Boros, Lisa
    Schaubruch, Lea M.
    Kunzler, Angela M.
    Lindner, Saskia
    Koehler, Friederike
    Werner, Tabea
    Zappala, Federico
    Helmreich, Isabella
    Wessa, Michele
    Lieb, Klaus
    Tuescher, Oliver
    NPJ DIGITAL MEDICINE, 2024, 7 (01)
  • [29] Barriers to Breast Cancer Screening in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Alsalamh, Reem
    Al-Harbi, Faisal A.
    Alotaibi, Rawan T.
    Al-Harbi, Omar N.
    Alshahrani, Nada
    Alfadhel, Saleh M.
    Fatani, Eyad R.
    Al-Harbi, Abdulaziz
    Lasloom, Razan A.
    Alzahrani, Rayan M.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2024, 16 (07)
  • [30] Disability and Participation in Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Andiwijaya, Fahrin Ramadan
    Davey, Calum
    Bessame, Khaoula
    Ndong, Abdourahmane
    Kuper, Hannah
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 19 (15)