4.6 Article

Cancer Screening in Native Americans from the Northern Plains

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
卷 38, 期 4, 页码 389-395

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.12.027

关键词

-

资金

  1. Community Academic Partnerships core of the University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational Research funded through an NIH [1 UL1 RR025011]
  2. National Cancer Institute [N01-CO-12400]
  3. NIH [RFA 1U56CA99010-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Native Americans from the Northern Plains have the highest age-adjusted cancer mortality compared to Native Americans from any other region in the U S. Purpose: This study examined the utilization and determinants of cancer screening in a large sample of Native Americans from the Northern Plains. Methods: A survey was administered orally to 975 individuals in 2004-2006 from three reservations and among the urban Native-American community in the service region of the Rapid City Regional Hospital. Data analysis was conducted in 2007-2008. Results: Forty-four percent of individuals reported ever receiving any cancer screening. Particularly low levels were found for breast, cervical, prostate, and colon cancer screening In multivariate analyses, the strongest determinant of receiving cancer screening overall or cancer screening for a specific cancer site was recommendation for screening by a doctor or nurse Other determinants associated with increased likelihood of ever having cancer screening included older age, female gender, and receiving physical exams more than once a year Increased age was a determinant of breast cancer screening, and receiving physical exams was associated with cervical cancer screening. Conclusions: Cancer screening was markedly underutilized in this sample of Native Americans from the Northern Plains Future research should evaluate the potential for improving cancer screening. (Am J Prev Med 2010,38(4) 389-395) (C) 2010 American Journal of Preventive Medicine

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据