Systematic reviews as a “lens of evidence”: Determinants of participation in breast cancer screening

Author:

Mandrik O123ORCID,Tolma E4,Zielonke N5,Meheus F3,Ordóñez-Reyes C6,Severens JL27ORCID,Murillo R368

Affiliation:

1. School of Health and Related Research, Health Economic and Decision Science (HEDS), The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

2. Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

3. Section of Early Detection and Prevention, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France

4. Faculty of Public Health, Kuwait University, Jabriya, Kuwait

5. Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

6. Centro Javeriano de Oncología, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Bogotá, Colombia

7. Institute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

8. Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia

Abstract

Objective To assess the determinants of the participation rate in breast cancer screening programs by conducting a systematic review of reviews. Methods We conducted a systematic search in PubMed via Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane identifying the literature up to April 2019. Out of 2258 revealed unique abstracts, we included 31 reviews, from which 25 were considered as systematic. We applied the Walsh & McPhee Systems Model of Clinical Preventive Care to systematize the determinants of screening participation. Results The reviews, mainly in high-income settings, reported a wide range for breast cancer screening participation rate: 16–90%. The determinants of breast cancer screening participation were simple low-cost interventions such as invitation letters, basic information on screening, multiple reminders, fixed appointments, prompts from healthcare professionals, and healthcare organizational factors (e.g. close proximity to screening facility). More complex interventions (such as face-to-face counselling or home visits), mass media or improved access to transport should not be encouraged by policy makers unless other information appears. The repeated participation in mammography screening was consistently high, above 62%. Previous positive experience with screening influenced the repeated participation in screening programs. The reviews were inconsistent in the use of terminology related to breast cancer screening participation, which may have contributed to the heterogeneity in the reported outcomes. Conclusions This study shows that consistent findings of systematic reviews bring more certainty into the conclusions on the effects of simple invitation techniques, fixed appointments and prompts, as well as healthcare organizational factors on promoting participation rate in screening mammography.

Funder

European Commission

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3