4.3 Article

Celebremos La Salud! A community randomized trial of cancer prevention (United States)

Journal

CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages 733-746

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-006-0006-x

Keywords

cervical cancer; breast cancer; colorectal cancer; pap test; mammogram; FOBT; sigmoidoscopy; colonoscopy; community intervention; hispanic

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA74968] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Compared to non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics in the United States are at higher risk for certain types of cancer. Methods In a randomized controlled trial of 20 communities, we examined whether a comprehensive intervention influenced cancer screening behaviors and lifestyle practices in rural communities in Eastern Washington State. Cross-sectional surveys at baseline and post-intervention included interviews with a random sample of approximately 100 households per community. The interview included questions on ever use and recent use of Pap test, mammogram, and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy, fruit and vegetable consumption and smoking practices. Results We found few significant changes in use of screening services for cervical (Pap test), breast (mammogram) or colorectal cancer (fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy) between intervention and control communities. We found no significant differences in fruit and vegetable consumption nor in smoking prevalence between the two groups. We found more awareness of and participation in intervention activities in the treatment communities than the control communities. Conclusions Our null findings might be attributable to the low dose of the intervention, a cohort effect, or contamination of the effect in non-intervention communities. Further research to identify effective strategies to improve cancer prevention lifestyle behaviors and screening practices are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available