PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Helen I Meissner

Publications and source records attributed to Helen I Meissner.

18 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Which women aren't getting mammograms and why? (United States).

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates why women who reported no recent mammogram did not get the test. METHODS: Using data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we examine correlates of mammography use among women 40 years and older (n = 10,212), with particular focus on the 30% (n = 3,188) who reported no recent mammogram. Non-screening is examined in the context of two important correlates of mammography use-access to health care and a physician's recommendation to get a mammogram. RESULTS: In total, 80% of non-screeners who reported having access to healthcare did not receive a recommendation for a mammogram. Women age 65 years and older were more likely than younger women to report not receiving a recommendation (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.25-2.50). For women who reported having access, non-screening was significantly more likely among younger women (40-49), those with less education, incomes less than 20,000 dollars, residence outside Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and no family history of breast cancer. Among women with access problems, those who had not visited a primary care provider in the past year were much more likely to be non-screeners (80%) compared with those who had seen a provider (46%). Among women with access, those who reported put it off as the main reason for non-screening were significantly more likely to be younger and to be born in the U.S. than women who said that they didn't know they needed a mammogram. CONCLUSIONS: Most non-screeners report not receiving a physician recommendation for mammography. Although a minority reported access problems, the effect of lacking access on utilization was strong and is accentuated when women without access do not see a doctor. These findings confirm the importance of a mammography recommendation and raise questions concerning whether this information is being conveyed by physicians or heard by patients.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Are there gender differences in colorectal cancer test use prevalence and correlates?

Despite evidence that screening tests reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, screening prevalence is low. Gender differences in test uptake have been reported, but few studies examine correlates of test use by gender. Differences, if present, may inform strategies to increase test use. We examined gender differences in the prevalence and correlates of colorectal cancer test use [fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and endoscopy] using data from the 2002 to 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey. Male (n = 999) and female (n = 1687) respondents ages > or =50 years, without a personal history of colorectal cancer, were interviewed by telephone. Age-adjusted prevalence rates were reported for lifetime, recent, and repeat use by gender and test type. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify correlates of test use stratified by gender and colorectal cancer test type. More females reported only using FOBT in lifetime and in the past year, whereas more males reported repeat endoscopy use. The use of other tests or combinations of tests did not differ by gender. Consistent positive correlates of colorectal cancer test use for both genders included age, recent physician visits, recent breast or prostate cancer screening, and knowledge of test-specific screening intervals. Correlates that differed by gender included comparative perceived risk, belief that colorectal cancer testing was too expensive, fear of finding colorectal cancer if tested, and attention to and trust in media sources of health information. Such differences, if confirmed in future studies, may inform the use of gender-specific intervention strategies or messages to increase colorectal cancer test use.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Patterns of colorectal cancer screening uptake among men and women in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report is to examine (a) gender-specific correlates of colorectal cancer test use using recent national data from 2003 and (b) patterns of colorectal cancer screening by gender and test modality over time. METHODS: We analyze data from the 1987, 1992, 1998, 2000, and 2003 National Health Interview Surveys. Our sample consists of men and women > or = 50 years never diagnosed with colorectal cancer and who reported a recent fecal occult blood test and/or endoscopy. RESULTS: In 2003, both men and women reported higher rates of colonoscopy (32.2% and 29.8%, respectively) than use of FOBT (16.1% and 15.3%, respectively) or sigmoidoscopy (7.6% and 5.9%, respectively). Men reported higher use of endoscopy than women if they had a usual source of health care, had talked to a general doctor, and had two to five visits to the doctor in the past year. Men and women 65 years and older had higher rates of any recommended colorectal cancer test (55.8% and 48.5%, respectively) than persons 50 to 64 years (males, 41.0%; females, 31.4%). Use of colorectal cancer tests also was higher among both genders if they were not Hispanic, had higher educational attainment, were former smokers, had health insurance or a usual source of care, or if they talked to a general doctor. Recent use of colorectal cancer tests has increased since 2000 for both women and men largely due to increased use of colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal cancer testing is increasing for both men and women, although the prevalence of testing remains higher in men. Our data support previous findings documenting socioeconomic disparities in colorectal cancer test use. Access barriers to screening could be particularly difficult to overcome if colonoscopy becomes the preferred colorectal cancer screening modality.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Factors associated with men's use of prostate-specific antigen screening: evidence from Health Information National Trends Survey.

BACKGROUND: Rapid uptake of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing has occurred in the United States despite inconclusive evidence regarding mortality benefit. METHODS: We examined data (n=927) from the 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey to assess prevalence of self-reported PSA use and its association with patients' decision making. RESULTS: Over half (55.2%) the sample reported ever having had a PSA test. Men aged 65-74 (OR=2.53, 1.49-4.31), with some college (OR=2.41, 1.22-4.77) or college degrees (OR=5.01, 2.53-9.90) were more likely to have had PSA tests, while men without health insurance (OR=0.32, 0.12-0.88) or a usual source of care (OR=0.35, 0.22-0.54) were less likely. In a model including healthcare provider communication and information seeking, men who reported that providers involved them in decisions (OR=1.76, 1.02-3.03) and recommended PSA (OR=236.3, 70.5-791.4) were more likely to have had the tests. Men aged 65-74 (OR=2.30, 1.33-4.00), with college degrees (OR=2.91, 1.45-5.82), and greater information attention/seeking (OR=1.23, 1.07-1.40) were more likely to report PSA recommendations, while those without usual care were less likely (OR=0.37, 0.22-0.64). Men without usual care (OR=0.38, 0.20-0.71) and Hispanic men (OR=0.40, 0.19-0.85) were less likely to report that healthcare providers involved them in healthcare decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Results emphasize the relevance of patient decision making and the importance of healthcare providers in PSA testing.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Toward a system of cancer screening in the United States: trends and opportunities.

The hard work of public health officials, physicians, and disease advocacy groups to educate Americans about the importance of early detection has resulted in uptake of screening tests at levels equivalent to or higher than in countries with organized cancer screening programs. However, the societal costs of high screening rates are larger in the United States than in other countries, including higher prices for screening, more unnecessary testing, and inefficiencies in delivery, especially in small practices. Further, screening rates are not evenly distributed across population groups, and the national expenditure on clinical and community research to promote cancer screening among individuals has not been matched by research efforts that focus on policy or clinical systems to increase screening widely throughout the population. We identify opportunities for organizational change that improve access to use, improve quality, and promote cost effectiveness in cancer screening delivery.

Cost of Illness↗
PubMed2004

Promoting cancer screening: Learning from experience.

This article provides an overview of behavioral and social science cancer screening intervention research and introduces the scope of topics addressed in this supplement to Cancer. The authors identify and address issues to consider before conducting interventions to promote the uptake of screening tests, such as the benefits and harms associated with screening. Trends in the use of cancer screening tests are discussed in the context of their efficacy and adoption over time. Both the development and breadth of social and behavioral intervention research intended to increase the use of effective tests are reviewed as background for the articles that follow. The application of the lessons from this extensive knowledge base not only should accelerate the uptake of the effective cancer screening tests currently available, but also can guide future directions for research.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2004

The future of research that promotes cancer screening.

The authors draw on the lessons highlighted in preceding articles in the current supplement to provide recommendations for cancer screening intervention research and to highlight some of the many questions that will require further investigation.

Biomedical Research↗
PubMed2004

Examination of population-wide trends in barriers to cancer screening from a diffusion of innovation perspective (1987-2000).

BACKGROUND: Barriers to cancer screening may change over time as screening becomes more widespread. METHODS: Using 1987, 1992, and 2000 National Health Interview Survey data, we examined population-wide trends in barriers to Pap, mammography, and colorectal screening (n =66,452). RESULTS: Lack of awareness was the most common barrier for all screening tests; it decreased by 13.5 percentage points for mammography and by 4.6 percentage points for colorectal screening, but increased by 3.0 percentage points for Pap test from 1987 to 2000. Decreases in not recommended by a doctor were observed for mammography (from 20.5% to 3.7%) and colorectal screening (from 22.3% to 14.2%). Examination of trends in barriers among sociodemographic and health care access subgroups revealed disparities for each screening test. CONCLUSIONS: Although population-wide progress has been made in reducing barriers to screening, lack of awareness, and not recommended by a doctor remain important barriers, especially among traditionally underserved populations.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

The role of area-level influences on prostate cancer grade and stage at diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: This research explores area-level social influences on prostate cancer, to test whether area-level influences explain disparities in U.S. prostate cancer burden. METHODS: The authors geocoded 23,993 1992-1997 Maryland prostate cancer cases, and linked cases to 1990 census data. The authors examined the effect of 17 area-level social variables, measured at block group, tract, and county, modeling individual and multilevel predictors of later stage and higher tumor grade. RESULTS: Younger age, black race, higher grade or ungraded tumors, and earlier year of diagnosis were associated with later stage. Block group percentage of white-collar workers (O.R. = 0.93, 95% C.I. = 0.89, 0.98), and county resources (O.R. = 0.94, 95% C.I. = 0.89, 0.98), were protective of later stage. Older age, black race, and earlier year of diagnosis were associated with higher grade. Block group income was protective for white men (O.R. = 0.92, 95% C.I. = 0.87, 0.96), but for all men, county resources increased risk of higher grade (O.R. = 1.23, 95% C.I. = 1.16, 1.31). CONCLUSIONS: Social resources did not significantly reduce racial differences. Results suggest tumor biology is related to relative resources, with better outcomes associated with greater small-area wealth in low-resource counties, but stage at diagnosis is associated with absolute resources, with better outcomes associated with higher small-area social class in high-resource counties.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

What factors are associated with diagnostic follow-up after abnormal mammograms? Findings from a U.S. National Survey.

The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal mammogram in a national sample of women in the U.S. The sample was selected from the year 2000 National Health Interview Survey and included 1901 women aged 30 and above who reported ever having an abnormal mammogram. The outcome measure was receipt of at least some diagnostic follow-up after an abnormal mammogram. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to explore the associations between sociodemographic characteristics, general health and health behaviors, cancer risk and risk perceptions, and health care utilization characteristics and follow-up. Approximately 9% of women who reported ever having abnormal mammograms reported not completing any additional diagnostic follow-up. Controlling for all other factors, women with less than a high school education were less likely to report follow-up after an abnormal mammogram than were women who had at least completed college (odds ratio = 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.32, 0.98). Younger women and women in poorer health were also less likely to report follow-up. Women who perceived a high versus low level of cancer in their family were more likely to report follow-up (odds ratio = 1.65; 95% confidence interval: 1.04, 2.62), controlling for all other factors. In a national sample of women with abnormal mammograms, a substantial number did not complete any diagnostic follow-up, potentially reducing the effectiveness of mammography screening programs in the U.S. Additional research on subsequent screening behaviors for women with incomplete follow-up and in-depth exploration of the roles of patient-provider interactions and health care system factors related to the index abnormal mammogram is warranted.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Smoking cessation interventions in U.S. racial/ethnic minority populations: an assessment of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Smoking prevalence rates in some ethnic minority groups are elevated relative to the majority population. Thus, identifying cessation interventions that are effective for these groups is important. This article reviews published studies that examine effects of smoking cessation interventions relevant to racial ethnic minority populations. METHODS: A literature search of tobacco interventions, reporting smoking cessation outcomes (including quit rates) in U.S. minority populations, was conducted for the period 1985 to 2001. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies met preset criteria for inclusion. Twenty-three reported quit rates for African Americans, 4 for Asian/Pacific Islanders, 3 for Native Americans, and 10 for Hispanics. CONCLUSIONS: The disproportionate number of studies that focused on African American smokers compared with the other major racial/ethnic groups suggests the need for continued efforts to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for all ethnic minority populations. Abstinence rates varied considerably depending on study design and intervention strategy. Moreover, a relatively small percentage of studies that were randomized trials reported statistically significant findings, and most used intervention strategies that do not reflect the current state-of-the-art. These results strongly suggest that more research is needed to identify successful smoking cessation interventions in these populations.

Black or African American↗
PubMed2003

Opportunities for oral cancer screening among older African-American women.

BACKGROUND: Older persons with smoking histories are important targets for oral cancer screening. Although older persons in low-income communities often lack regular dental care, little is known about the characteristics of groups at greatest risk for poor screening. METHODS: Survey data from 576 African-American women aged 45-93 were used to identify predictors of smoking and recency and type of dental care. RESULTS: Fifty-nine percent of respondents were current or former smokers, and 62% reported dental care within the past 3 years. Among smokers, no recent dental care was associated with older age, worse health, not working, no regular medical provider, and no recent mammography. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that episodic visits to non dentist providers offer opportunities for oral screening in high-risk populations.

Black or African American↗
PubMed2003

Whatever happened to clinical breast examinations?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine trends in the use of clinical breast examinations (CBE), mammography, and both tests between the years 1990 and 2000. METHODS: Receipt of breast cancer screening tests (CBE, mammography, and both tests combined) for white, black, and Hispanic women in 1990, 1994, 1998, and 2000 were examined by sociodemographic, access, and health risk indicators using data from the National Health Interview Survey. RESULTS: The use of mammography increased from 1990 to 2000, but the proportion of women reporting a recent CBE decreased for almost all groups of women. Differential use of CBE by sociodemographic characteristics is consistent with what has been documented for mammography. CONCLUSIONS: Although the use of mammography has increased since 1990, there has been a downward trend in the use of CBE. Healthcare providers should be aware of the lower rates of CBE, particularly among women with compromised access to health care, and should not assume that women who get mammograms have received comprehensive screening for breast cancer.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Another round in the mammography controversy.

PURPOSE: The October 2001 publication of a meta-analysis questioning the scientific basis for recommending screening mammography sparked yet a new flame of controversy about this issue. We conducted a national survey in March 2002 to provide information about women's perspectives on the issues, including the evidence regarding the efficacy of mammography and, ultimately, their intentions to continue screening. METHODS: We added 12 questions to a national telephone omnibus survey in March 2002 to assess women's reactions to the ongoing debate. Responses were collected over three waves of the twice-weekly survey to obtain data from 733 women between the ages of 40 and 69. The sample was weighted to the U.S. population for census region, age, race, ethnicity, and educational attainment. RESULTS: Consistent with prior studies, most women were getting regular mammograms (78%) (95% confidence interval [CI] 75%-81%), >90% believed that mammography is effective in detecting breast cancer (95%) (95% CI 93%-97%) and in reducing breast cancer mortality (93%) (95% CI 91%-96%), and only about 22% (95% CI 19%-25%) said they were confused. Logistic regression analyses revealed sociodemographic differences among women who had heard about the controversy and who reported some confusion about mammograms. Women with lower levels of education, younger women, and those residing in nonmetropolitan areas were significantly less likely to be aware of the controversy. Although a majority of women said they were not confused about mammography, minority women and women with lower education levels were more likely to report being confused. There were no significant demographic differences in intentions to get future mammograms. Women who were concerned about getting breast cancer were much more likely to be planning to have future mammograms than women who were not at all concerned (odds ratio [OR] 3.63; 95% CI 2.37, 5.56). Likewise, respondents who said that they had enough information to make decisions whether to get future mammograms were much more likely to plan on getting screened than women who said they did not have enough information (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.14, 5.40). CONCLUSIONS: These results do not suggest that controversy leads to lower rates of adherence. They do indicate that some women lack the information needed to make informed decisions about mammography.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

The hormone therapy dilemma: women respond.

OBJECTIVE: In the wake of the premature end of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study, we sought to assess women's knowledge of and attitudes about hormone therapy (HT) study findings and to appraise women's responses and intentions. METHODS: Between July 26 and August 6, 2002 a national random-digit-dialing telephone survey was conducted in a sample of households that included women 40 to 79 years old. RESULTS: Sixty-four percent of the 819 women interviewed had heard something about HT study results from the media or from talking with others, and 74% were confused about HT use. Another 57% were worried about how the findings might affect them, and 79% were interested in obtaining additional information about HT Only 24% of those who had heard something had actually sought additional information. Logistic regression findings suggested that women currently taking HT were most likely to be aware and informed. They also were more likely to be confused, worried, or to need or to seek additional information. Older women were less likely to be confused or worried or to need or seek additional information. More highly educated women were more likely to be aware and less likely to be confused or uninformed, but were more likely to have sought additional information. CONCLUSION: The Women's Health Initiative study provided a clear message about health risks and benefits of HT use. An important next step is to continue to convey accurate information to women, health providers, and the media so that women can make informed decisions about HT.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

If we gave away mammograms, who would get them? A neighborhood evaluation of a no-cost breast cancer screening program.

BACKGROUND: Low- and no-cost mammography programs have become a widespread strategy to increase access to breast cancer screening in low-income populations. However, rigorous evaluations of who remains unscreened in communities with these programs are lacking. We conducted a case-control study of African American older women in East Baltimore, Maryland, comparing attendees at a no-cost program to friends and neighbors not using no-cost venues. METHODS: We recruited 288 women ages 50 and older, who attended a no-cost program at Johns Hopkins Hospital, to complete a 1(1/2) h home interview, answering semistructured and open-ended questions about cancer and health and a wide range of social and psychological items. For each case, we recruited one friend or neighbor, within 5 years of age, not receiving no-cost screening, to complete a similar control interview. Matched case-control analyses were used to compare program attendees to nonattendees within the target community. RESULTS: Women using the no-cost program at least once were generally more poorly screened than their neighborhood control prior to the program, but had better recent screening history 3 years after the program began. In multivariate analyses, program attendees were more likely to have <10,000 dollars annual income (OR = 2.34, 95% CI 1.55,3.61), more likely to have had more children (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.04,1.24), and less likely to have health insurance (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.25,0.68). They were more likely to see a female primary care provider (OR = 1.82, 95% CI 1.24,2.70) and to see multiple providers (OR = 3.38, 95% CI 1.52,8.60). CONCLUSIONS: Low-cost screening intervention programs reach women who might otherwise not receive screening. However, within target communities, improved partnerships with specific types of primary care providers could reach additional women.

Black or African American↗
PubMed2002

The effectiveness of interventions to promote mammography among women with historically lower rates of screening.

This study examines mammography-enhancing intervention studies that focus on women in groups with historically lower rates of mammography use than the general population. These groups consist of women who are disproportionately older, poorer, of racial-ethnic minorities, have lower levels of formal education, and live in rural areas. We refer to them as diverse populations. The purpose of this report is to determine which types of mammography-enhancing interventions are most effective for these diverse populations. For this report, United States and international studies with concurrent controls that reported actual receipt of mammograms (usually based on self-report) as an outcome were eligible for inclusion. Intervention effects were measured by differences in intervention and control group screening rates postintervention and were weighted to reflect the certainty of each study's contribution. These effects differed significantly (Q = 218, 34 df), and the variation between studies was best explained by indicators of the use of access-enhancing approaches. Combined intervention effects were estimated for different categories of intervention types using random effects models for subgroups of studies. The strongest combination of approaches used access-enhancing and individual-directed strategies and resulted in an estimated 27% increase in mammography use (95% confidence interval, 9.9-43.9, nine studies). Additionally impressive was the access-enhancing and system-directed combination (20% increase and 95% confidence interval, 8.2-30.6, five studies). Access-enhancing strategies are an important complement to individual- and system-directed interventions for women with historically lower rates of screening.

Aged↗