4.7 Article

Mammography screening among Chinese-American women

Journal

CANCER
Volume 97, Issue 5, Pages 1293-1302

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.11169

Keywords

mammography; screening; Asian; Chinese

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [U01 CA086322] Funding Source: Medline
  2. PHS HHS [74326, 86322] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND. Breast carcinoma is the most common major malignancy among several Asian-American populations. This study surveyed mammography screening knowledge and practices among Chinese-American women. METHODS. In 1999, the authors conducted a cross-sectional, community-based survey in Seattle, Washington. Bilingual and bicultural interviewers administered surveys in Mandarin, Cantonese, or English at participants' homes. RESULTS. The survey cooperation rate (responses among reachable and eligible households) was 72% with 350 eligible women (age ! 40 years with no prior history of breast carcinoma or double mastectomy). Seventy-four percent of women reported prior mammography screening, and 61% of women reported screening in the last 2 years. In multivariate analysis, a strong association was found between mammography screening and recommendations by physicians and nurses (prior screening: odds ratio [OR], 16.0; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 7.8-35.0; recent screening: OR, 7.0; 95% CI, 3.8-13.6). This finding applied to both recent immigrants (< 15 years in the U.S.) and earlier immigrants (< 15 years in the U.S.). Thirty-two percent of women reported that the best way to detect breast carcinoma was a modality other than mammogram. CONCLUSIONS. The authors recommend a multifaceted approach to increase mammography screening by Chinese-American women: recommendations from the provider plus targeted education to address the effectiveness of screening mammography compared with breast self examination and clinical breast examination. (C) 2003 American Cancer Society.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available