Validation of Self-reported Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening in a Study of Ethnically Diverse First-Degree Relatives of CRC Cases

Bastani, Roshan; Glenn, Beth A.; Maxwell, Annette E.; Ganz, Patricia A.; Mojica, Cynthia M.; Chang, Lin

doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-07-2625

Cited by 26 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Methods for validation studies are difficult, costly, and may not be feasible (12). Schenck et al (13) illustrate the considerable resources needed to find multiple health-care providers in various locations to provide complete data on a single study participant.…”

Section: Researchers and Practitioners Can Consider Opportunities To mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Schenck et al (13) illustrate the considerable resources needed to find multiple health-care providers in various locations to provide complete data on a single study participant. One approach that was taken by several investigators (9,10,12,13) was to nest validation studies in other projects.…”

Section: Researchers and Practitioners Can Consider Opportunities To mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The articles consider a number of different populations, including U.S. veterans (7), firstdegree relatives (12), the general adult population in five Minnesota counties (9), North Carolina Medicare enrollees (13), a random digit dial sample of Minnesota adults (10), and patients of a large Texas clinic system (8). The findings of Bastani et al (12) underscore the lesson that CRC screening behaviors are complex cognitive tasks, and the growing cultural diversity of populations adds to this complexity. As noted in the meta-analyses of multiple screening tests (6), racial/ethnic variation in estimates of sensitivity and specificity can mask disparities in prevalence estimates.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As noted in the meta-analyses of multiple screening tests (6), racial/ethnic variation in estimates of sensitivity and specificity can mask disparities in prevalence estimates. This complexity is further heightened by the opportunistic approach to screening in the United States, where testing and the process of screening can take place in numerous settings that lack integration and communication (12,14). Further, the uneven quality and feasibility of record access in different health care settings poses another challenge to validation studies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, the uneven quality and feasibility of record access in different health care settings poses another challenge to validation studies. Finally, it is difficult to collect validation information for groups that are often the target of intervention, such as samples recruited from cancer registries or community groups (12).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Validation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Behaviors

Zapka

2008

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of identifying efficacious and effective strategies to improve the use of evidence-based cancer screening tests and reduce disparities is well documented (1). Among many methodologic challenges to rigorous study design (2) are several related to obtaining reliable and valid measures of screening behaviors. Meissner and colleagues (3) have made several major recommendations for future research studies that promote the use of cancer screening. Included in these recommendations are the importance of developing and testing standardized behavioral outcome measures, and the need for additional studies of reliability and validity in different population subgroups.Vernon and colleagues (2) have emphasized that selection and measurement of primary outcome measures is critical to the credibility of studies of systems and behavioral change interventions. The authors identified seven important ''lessons learned'' for cancer screening research. Among these lessons were (a) the need for agreement regarding conceptual and operational definitions of behavioral outcomes; and (b) that studies, using self-reported cancer-screening participation, should assess reliability and validity and quantify measurement error and bias in a broad range of respondents.With regard to the first point, the need for agreement on operational definitions, progress has been made with respect to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening behaviors.

show abstract

Section: Researchers and Practitioners Can Consider Opportunities To mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Researchers and Practitioners Can Consider Opportunities To mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Validation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Behaviors

Zapka

2008

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Alternative approaches to assessing intervention effectiveness in randomized trials: application in a colorectal cancer screening study

Maxwell

Crespi

Danao

et al. 2011

Cancer Causes Control

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Previous analysis of a randomized community-based trial of a multi-component intervention to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among Filipino Americans (n=548) found significantly higher screening rates in the two intervention groups compared to the control group, when using intent-to-treat analysis and self-reported screening as the outcome. This report describes more nuanced findings obtained from alternative approaches to assessing intervention effectiveness to inform future intervention implementation. METHODS The effect of the intervention on CRC screening receipt during follow-up was estimated using methods that adjusted for biases due to missing data and self-report, and for different combinations of intervention components. Adjustment for self-report used data from a validation substudy. Effectiveness within demographic subgroups was also examined. RESULTS Analyses accounting for self-report bias and missing data supported the effectiveness of the intervention. The intervention was also broadly effective across the demographic characteristics of the sample. Estimates of the intervention effect were highest among participants whose providers received a letter as part of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS The findings increase confidence that the intervention could be broadly effective at increasing CRC screening in this population. Subgroup analyses and attempts to deconstruct multi-component interventions can provide important information for future intervention development, implementation and dissemination.

show abstract

Associations among family history of cancer, cancer screening and lifestyle behaviors: a population-based study

Bostean

Crespi

McCarthy

2013

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Some cancers are largely preventable through modification of certain behavioral risk factors and preventive screening, even among those with a family history of cancer. This study examined the associations between: (1) family cancer history and cancer screening; (2) family history and cancer preventive lifestyle behaviors; and, (3) cancer screening and lifestyle behaviors. Methods Data were from the 2009 California Health Interview Survey (n=12,603). Outcomes included screening for breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) and six cancer preventive lifestyle behaviors, based on World Cancer Research Fund recommendations. Multivariate logistic regression analyses, stratified by gender and race-ethnicity, examined associations. Predicted probabilities of cancer screening by family cancer history, race-ethnicity and sex were computed. Results Family history of site-specific cancer—CRC for men and women, and BC for women—was associated with higher probability of cancer screening for most groups, especially for CRC, but was largely unrelated to other lifestyle behaviors. In the few cases in which family history was significantly associated with lifestyle—e.g., physical activity among White and Latino males, smoking among White and Asian females—individuals with a family history had lower odds of adherence to recommendations than those with no family history. Greater overall adherence to lifestyle recommendations was associated with higher odds of up-to-date CRC screening among White and Asian males, and lower odds among Asian females (no significant association with BC screening); this relationship did not vary by family cancer history. Conclusions The fact that family history of cancer is not associated with better lifestyle behaviors may reflect shared behavioral risks within families, or the lack of knowledge about how certain lifestyle behaviors impact personal cancer risk. Findings can inform interventions aimed at lifestyle behavioral modification for individuals at increased cancer risk due to family history.

show abstract

Validation of Self-reported Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening in a Study of Ethnically Diverse First-Degree Relatives of CRC Cases

Cited by 26 publications

References 11 publications

Validation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Behaviors

Validation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Behaviors

Alternative approaches to assessing intervention effectiveness in randomized trials: application in a colorectal cancer screening study

Associations among family history of cancer, cancer screening and lifestyle behaviors: a population-based study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About