Predictors of Loss to Self-report Follow-up Data Collection in a Cancer Screening Intervention

IF 0.5 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Behavior and Policy Review Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.14485/hbpr.9.4.1
W. Rakowski, T. Stump, P. Monahan, Eric Vachon, T. Imperiale, S. Rawl, V. Champion
{"title":"Predictors of Loss to Self-report Follow-up Data Collection in a Cancer Screening Intervention","authors":"W. Rakowski, T. Stump, P. Monahan, Eric Vachon, T. Imperiale, S. Rawl, V. Champion","doi":"10.14485/hbpr.9.4.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Losing participants’ self-report data affects process and outcome analyses, and ultimately, conclusions about results. In this paper, we examine predictors of loss to self-report data collection and attempt to identify potential predictors that can be addressed prospectively. Methods: Data were from a study to increase colorectal and breast cancer screening in women 50-75 years of age (N = 1196). We collected self-report data at baseline (T1), 4 weeks (T2), and 6 months (T3) after consent. Analyses identified predictors of earliest loss (T1 vs T1,T2,T3), intermediate loss (T1 vs T1,T2), and later loss (T1,T2 vs T1,T2,T3). Results: Cancer knowledge and self-reported screening barriers were associated with loss to follow-up. More health problems were associated with less intermediate loss to follow-up, but higher loss to later follow-up. Two intervention groups (Web Only, and Web + Phone) showed greater loss compared to Usual Care. Being overdue for both screenings predicted early loss. Completing the T1 survey by phone was associated with greater loss to follow-up. Conclusions: Knowledge and barriers may have had an early effect, whereas health problems might have had a delayed impact. Intervention characteristics also need to be considered as a source of task demands on participants.","PeriodicalId":44486,"journal":{"name":"Health Behavior and Policy Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Behavior and Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14485/hbpr.9.4.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Losing participants’ self-report data affects process and outcome analyses, and ultimately, conclusions about results. In this paper, we examine predictors of loss to self-report data collection and attempt to identify potential predictors that can be addressed prospectively. Methods: Data were from a study to increase colorectal and breast cancer screening in women 50-75 years of age (N = 1196). We collected self-report data at baseline (T1), 4 weeks (T2), and 6 months (T3) after consent. Analyses identified predictors of earliest loss (T1 vs T1,T2,T3), intermediate loss (T1 vs T1,T2), and later loss (T1,T2 vs T1,T2,T3). Results: Cancer knowledge and self-reported screening barriers were associated with loss to follow-up. More health problems were associated with less intermediate loss to follow-up, but higher loss to later follow-up. Two intervention groups (Web Only, and Web + Phone) showed greater loss compared to Usual Care. Being overdue for both screenings predicted early loss. Completing the T1 survey by phone was associated with greater loss to follow-up. Conclusions: Knowledge and barriers may have had an early effect, whereas health problems might have had a delayed impact. Intervention characteristics also need to be considered as a source of task demands on participants.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
癌症筛查干预中自我报告随访数据收集损失的预测因素
目的:丢失参与者的自我报告数据会影响过程和结果分析,并最终影响对结果的结论。在本文中,我们检查了自我报告数据收集损失的预测因素,并试图确定可以前瞻性解决的潜在预测因素。方法:数据来自一项增加50-75岁女性癌症结直肠癌和乳腺癌筛查的研究(N=1196)。我们收集了同意后基线(T1)、4周(T2)和6个月(T3)的自我报告数据。分析确定了最早损失(T1 vs T1,T2,T3)、中期损失(T1 vs T1,T2)和后期损失(T1,T2 vs T1,T2,T3)的预测因素。结果:癌症知识和自我报告的筛查障碍与随访损失相关。更多的健康问题与较少的中期随访损失有关,但与更高的后期随访损失有关。与常规护理相比,两个干预组(仅网络和网络+电话)显示出更大的损失。两次放映都逾期了,预计会提前损失。通过电话完成T1调查与更大的随访损失有关。结论:知识和障碍可能产生了早期影响,而健康问题可能产生了延迟影响。干预特征也需要被视为参与者任务需求的来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Behavior and Policy Review
Health Behavior and Policy Review PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
Internalized Homonegativity is Indirectly Associated with Smoking Status through Somatic Anxiety. Trauma Informed Care Can Enhance Whole Person Care to Meet the Quadruple Aim Barriers to Cervical Cancer Screening among Sub-Saharan African Immigrant Women in the United States: A Qualitative Report Socioeconomic Factors, Movement Behavior Context, and Self-reported Physical and Mental Health in Adults Living in New York City Exploring the Common Factors that Influence Physical Activity, Academic Self-efficacy, and Depression among Junior High School Students: A Literature Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1