2010
DOI: 10.1007/s13187-010-0141-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predicting Breast and Colon Cancer Screening Among English-as-a-Second-Language Older Chinese Immigrant Women to Canada

Abstract: Little is known about the cancer screening behaviors of older ESL Chinese immigrant women. To explore predictors of colon and breast cancer screening in this population, 103 Mandarin- and Cantonese-speaking immigrant women ages 50 years and older were recruited. Participants completed questionnaires to evaluate screening behaviors, health literacy, and demographic characteristics. Eighty-five percent self-reported that they were current breast cancer screeners, and 75% were current colon cancer screeners. Reco… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

11
59
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(49 reference statements)
11
59
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Compared with studies conducted in comparative age groups in the Chinese population, the participation rate in the present study was similar to that reported in the Hong Kong and Singapore studies (24.5%e26.5%) (Ng et al, 2007;So et al, 2012) but lower than that in the US and Canadian studies (34.7%e75%) (Ma et al, 2012;Sun et al, 2004;Todd et al, 2011;Wang et al, 2006;Yip et al, 2006). The difference in the participation rates might be because CRC screening is opportunistic in the Asian region while it is programmatic in the USA and Canada as financial support is frequently reported as a barrier in the literature (Beydoun and Beydoun, 2008;Guessous et al, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Compared with studies conducted in comparative age groups in the Chinese population, the participation rate in the present study was similar to that reported in the Hong Kong and Singapore studies (24.5%e26.5%) (Ng et al, 2007;So et al, 2012) but lower than that in the US and Canadian studies (34.7%e75%) (Ma et al, 2012;Sun et al, 2004;Todd et al, 2011;Wang et al, 2006;Yip et al, 2006). The difference in the participation rates might be because CRC screening is opportunistic in the Asian region while it is programmatic in the USA and Canada as financial support is frequently reported as a barrier in the literature (Beydoun and Beydoun, 2008;Guessous et al, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Information regarding the determinants of CRC screening behavior in Chinese populations, however, is scarce. A few studies have been conducted in such populations but none of them has targeted older people and most have focused solely on demographic and health-related variables (Cai et al, 2009;Leung et al, 2012aLeung et al, , 2012bMa et al, 2012;So et al, 2012;Sung et al, 2008;Todd et al, 2011;Wang et al, 2006;Yip et al, 2006). Clearly, little is known about CRC screening participation rates and associated factors among Chinese older people.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Women with a higher educational level were more likely to know about breast self-examination (BSE), to know about mammograms, and to practice BSE compared with those with a lower educational level (Rasu et al, 2011). Similar to this finding of this study, the previous studies indicate that more the level of educational background, higher the level of use of the breast cancer screening methods (López-de-Andrés et al, 2010;Park et al, 2011;Todd et al, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…Participants (n=29) were part of a larger study examining cancer screening utilization and comprehension of colon cancer information [18,19]. Of the original study participants 37 were eligible for inclusion in this study; however, women who refused to be audio-recorded (n=4), did not have time to complete the interview (n=2) or refused to answer interview questions in English (n=2) were excluded from analysis.…”
Section: Participants and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%