Mo1928 Improving Participation Rates in Community-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening - Role of a Blood Test As a Novel Biomarker

2015 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. S-741-S-742
Author(s):  
Erin L. Symonds ◽  
Susanne K. Pedersen ◽  
Stephen R. Cole ◽  
David Murray ◽  
Joe Massolino ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. 106420
Author(s):  
Nuria Vives ◽  
Núria Milà ◽  
Gemma Binefa ◽  
Noemie Travier ◽  
Albert Farre ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 656-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Navkiran K. Shokar ◽  
Theresa Byrd ◽  
David R. Lairson ◽  
Rebekah Salaiz ◽  
Junghyun Kim ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 332-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.S.T. Ng ◽  
C.H. Tan ◽  
D.C.L. Teo ◽  
C.Y.E. Seah ◽  
K.H. Phua

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. e016941 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Mark Kelly ◽  
Carla Estaquio ◽  
Christophe Léon ◽  
Pierre Arwidson ◽  
Hermann Nabi

ObjectivesCancer screening is a form of secondary prevention for a disease which is now the leading cause of death in France. Various socioeconomic indicators have been identified as potential factors for disparities in breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening uptake. We aimed to identify the socioeconomic inequalities, which persisted in screening uptake for these cancers, and to quantify these disparities over a 5-year period.SettingThe Cancer Barometer was a population-based-survey carried out in 2005 and 2010 in France.ParticipantsA randomly selected sample of participants aged 15–85 years (n=3820 in 2005 and n=3727 in 2010) were interviewed on their participation in breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening-programmes and their socioeconomic profile.Primary and secondary outcome measuresFor each type of screening programme, we calculated participation rates, OR and relative inequality indices (RII) for participation, derived from logistic regression of the following socioeconomic variables: income, education, occupation, employment and health insurance. Changes in participation between 2005 and 2010 were then analysed.ResultsParticipation rates for breast and colorectal screening increased significantly among the majority of socioeconomic categories, whereas for cervical cancer screening there were no significant changes between 2005 and 2010. RIIs for income remained significant for cervical smear in 2005 (RII=0.25, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.48) and in 2010 (RII=0.31, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.64). RIIs for education in mammography (RII=0.43, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.98) and cervical smear (RII=0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.64) were significant in 2005 and remained significant for cervical smear (RII=0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.74) in 2010.ConclusionsThere was a persistence of socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of opportunistic cervical cancer screening. Conversely, organised screening programmes for breast and colorectal cancer saw a reduction in relative socioeconomic inequalities, even though the results were not statistically significant. The findings suggest that organised cancer screening programmes may have the potential to reduce socioeconomic disparities in participation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document