Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
BackgroundVaccination and screening are forms of primary and secondary prevention methods. These methods are recommended for controlling the spread of a vast number of diseases and conditions. To determine the most effective preventive methods to be used by a society, multi-level models have shown to be more effective than models that focus solely on individual level characteristics. The Social Ecological Model (SEM) and the Theory of Triadic Influence (TTI) are such models. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify main differences and similarities of SEM and TTI regarding screening and vaccination in order to prepare potentially successful prevention programs for practice.MethodsA systematic review was conducted. Separate literature searches were performed during January and February 2015 using Medline, Ovid, Proquest, PubMed, University of Antwerp Discovery Service and Web of Science, for articles that apply the SEM and TTI.A Data Extraction Form with mostly closed-end questions was developed to assist with data extraction. Aggregate descriptive statistics were utilized to summarize the general characteristics of the SEM and TTI as documented in the scientific literature.ResultsA total of 290 potentially relevant articles referencing the SEM were found. As for the TTI, a total of 131 potentially relevant articles were found. After strict evaluation for inclusion and exclusion criteria, 40 SEM studies and 46 TTI studies were included in the systematic review.ConclusionsThe SEM and TTI are theoretical frameworks that share many theoretical concepts and are relevant for several types of health behaviors. However, they differ in the structure of the model, and in how the variables are thought to interact with each other, the TTI being a matrix while the SEM has a ring structure. The main difference consists of the division of the TTI into levels of causation (ultimate, distal and proximal) which are not considered within the levels of the SEM. It was further found that in the articles studied in this systematic review, both models are often considered effective, while the empirical basis of these (and other) conclusions reached by their authors is in many cases unclear or incompletely specified.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3802-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
BackgroundVaccination and screening are forms of primary and secondary prevention methods. These methods are recommended for controlling the spread of a vast number of diseases and conditions. To determine the most effective preventive methods to be used by a society, multi-level models have shown to be more effective than models that focus solely on individual level characteristics. The Social Ecological Model (SEM) and the Theory of Triadic Influence (TTI) are such models. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify main differences and similarities of SEM and TTI regarding screening and vaccination in order to prepare potentially successful prevention programs for practice.MethodsA systematic review was conducted. Separate literature searches were performed during January and February 2015 using Medline, Ovid, Proquest, PubMed, University of Antwerp Discovery Service and Web of Science, for articles that apply the SEM and TTI.A Data Extraction Form with mostly closed-end questions was developed to assist with data extraction. Aggregate descriptive statistics were utilized to summarize the general characteristics of the SEM and TTI as documented in the scientific literature.ResultsA total of 290 potentially relevant articles referencing the SEM were found. As for the TTI, a total of 131 potentially relevant articles were found. After strict evaluation for inclusion and exclusion criteria, 40 SEM studies and 46 TTI studies were included in the systematic review.ConclusionsThe SEM and TTI are theoretical frameworks that share many theoretical concepts and are relevant for several types of health behaviors. However, they differ in the structure of the model, and in how the variables are thought to interact with each other, the TTI being a matrix while the SEM has a ring structure. The main difference consists of the division of the TTI into levels of causation (ultimate, distal and proximal) which are not considered within the levels of the SEM. It was further found that in the articles studied in this systematic review, both models are often considered effective, while the empirical basis of these (and other) conclusions reached by their authors is in many cases unclear or incompletely specified.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3802-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background: The incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer are high among Filipino women. The lack of knowledge on preventive behavior and early detection related to breast cancer is considered a reason. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the association between knowledge about breast cancer and selected sociodemographic characteristics, daily life factors, reproductive factors, and perceived breast cancer risk factors. Patients and Methods: This study used a cross-sectional design. The study population consisted of 527 women. Interviews were conducted by the investigators. The contents of the questionnaire collected basic characteristics of the respondents, including their sociodemographic profiles, their knowledge of breast cancer risk factors, preventive behaviors, early detection, and their daily life and reproductive factors. Predictor variables were analyzed using a Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and a t-test. Multivariate logistic regression was applied for any significant differences (P < 0.005) among the predictor variables. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's HDS were used to evaluate the association between education level and reproductive factors. Results: Less than half of the women (42.7%) had knowledge on breast cancer risk factors, and an equivalent number had knowledge on breast cancer symptoms. Women with higher educational levels were noted to give birth to their first child at a significantly older age and have a significantly lower number of childbirths. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that body mass index, education history, knowledge about symptoms, knowing how to conduct a breast self-examination, family history of cancer, and passive smoking could predict breast cancer knowledge. Conclusions: Women who were aware of risk factors for breast cancer possessed a higher education level and had knowledge of the association of risk factors with preventive behaviors and early detection. However, a minority of women (42.7%) knew enough about breast cancer, preventive behaviors, and what actions to take for early detection.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.