Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The relationship between social network characteristics and breast cancer screening practices among employed women

  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

This study examined the relationship between social network characteristics and breast cancer screening practices among employed women. We hypothesized that larger social networks, higher levels of support from networks, and stronger social influences to undergo screening would be positively associated with regular utilization of mammograms and clinical breast examinations. Data were collected from women aged 52 and over who were employed in 27 worksites (N=1,045). Social network characteristics, breast cancer screening practices, and sociodemographic factors were assessed in a self-administered survey. Bivariate analyses revealed that social influences were significantly associated with regular screening; social support was only marginally associated with regular screening; and social network size was not at all associated. In multivariate analyses, only the perception that screening is normative among one’s peers was predictive of regular screening. Provider recommendation was the single most potent predictor of regular screening. These findings provide support for the importance of social norms in motivating women to adhere to screening guidelines. In addition, they underscore the potent impact of provider recommendations on women’s screening practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society:Cancer Facts and Figures-1998. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, Sandrock C, Ernster VL: Efficacy of screening mammography.Journal of the American Medical Association. 1995,273:149–154.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force:Guide to Clinical Preventive Services: An Assessment of the Effectiveness of 169 Interventions. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  4. National Cancer Institute: NCI adopts new mammography screening guidelines for women.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1997,89:538–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Anderson LM, May DS: Has the use of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening increased in the United States?American Journal of Public Health. 1995,85:840–842.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: State and sex-specific prevalence of selected characteristics—Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1994 and 1995.Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1997,46(SS03):1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rimer BK: Understanding the acceptance of mammography by women.Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 1992,14:197–203.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Calle EE, Miracle-McMahill HL, Moss RE, Health CW: Personal contact from friends to increase mammography usage.American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1994,10:361–366.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Clover K, Redman S, Forbes J, Sanson-Fisher R, Callaghan T: Two sequential randomized trials of community participation to recruit women for mammographic screening.Preventive Medicine. 1996,25:126–134.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Davis DT, Bustamante A, Brown CP, et al: The urban church and cancer control: A source of social influence in minority communities.Public Health Reports. 1994,109:500–506.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Earp JL, Altpeter M, Mayne L, Viadro CI, O’Malley MS: The North Carolina Breast Cancer Screening Program: Foundations and design of a model for reaching older, minority, rural women.Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 1995,35:7–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Eng E: The Save Our Sisters Project: A social network strategy for reaching rural Black women.Cancer. 1993,72:1071–1077.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Eng E, Smith J: Natural helping functions of lay health advisors in breast cancer education.Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 1995,35:23–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. List MA, Lacey L, Hopkins E, Burton D: The involvement of low literate elderly women in the development and distribution of cancer screening materials.Journal of Family and Community Health. 1994,17:42–55.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Morisky DE, Fox SA, Murata PJ, Stein JA: The role of needs assessment in designing a community-based mammography education program for urban women.Health Education Research. 1989,4:469–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Suarez L, Nichols DC, Brady CA: Use of peer role models to increase Pap smear and mammogram screening in Mexican-American and Black women.American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1993,9:290–296.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sung JF, Coates RJ, Williams JE, et al: Cancer screening intervention among Black women in inner-city Atlanta—Design of a study.Public Health Reports. 1992,107:381–388.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Urban N, Taplin SH, Taylor VM, et al: Community organization to promote breast cancer screening among women ages 50–75.Preventive Medicine. 1995,24:477–484.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rimer BK: Mammography use in the U.S.: Trends and the impact of interventions.Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 1994,16:317–326.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Montano DE, Taplin SH: A test of an expanded Theory of Reasoned Action to predict mammography participation.Social Sciences in Medicine. 1991,32:733–741.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Brown RL, Baumann LJ, Helberg CP, et al: The simultaneous analysis of patient, physician, and group practice influences on annual mammography performance.Social Science in Medicine. 1996,43:315–324.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Calnan M: Patterns in preventive behavior: A study of women in middle age.Social Science in Medicine. 1985,20:263–268.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kang SH, Bloom JR: Social support and cancer screening among older Black Americans.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1993,85:737–742.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kang SH, Bloom JR, Romano PS: Cancer screening among African-American women: Their use of tests and social support.American Journal of Public Health. 1994,84:101–103.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kruse J, Phillips DM: Factors influencing women’s decision to undergo mammography.Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1987,70:744–748.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Suarez L, Lloyd L, Weiss N, Rainbolt T, Pulley L: Effect of social networks on cancer-screening behavior of older Mexican-American women.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1994,86:775–779.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sutton S, Bickler G, Sancho-Aldridge J, Saidi G: Prospective study of predictors of attendance for breast screening in inner London.Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 1994,48:65–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Zapka JG, Stoddard AM, Costanza ME, Greene HL: Breast cancer screening by mammography: Utilization and associated factors.American Journal of Public Health. 1989,79:1499–1502.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Glanz K, Resch N, Lerman C, et al: Factors associated with adherence to breast cancer screening among working women.Journal of Occupational Medicine. 1992,34:1071–1078.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Champion V: Relationship of age to mammography compliance.Cancer. 1994,74:329–335.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Rimer BK, Trock B, Engstrom PF: Why do some women get regular mammograms?American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1991,7:69–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. King E, Rimer BK, Balshem A, Ross E, Seay J: Mammography-related beliefs among older women.Journal of Aging and Health. 1993,5:82–100.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Lerman C, Rimer B, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstron PF: Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening.Preventive Medicine. 1990,19:279–290.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Champion VL: Compliance with guidelines for mammography screening.Cancer Detection and Prevention. 1992,16:253–258.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Bureau of the Census: We the American women. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Berkman LF, Syme SL: Social networks host resistance and mortality: A nine-year follow-up of Alameda County residents.American Journal of Epidemiology. 1979,109:186–204.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Broadhead WE, Gehlbach SH, DeGruy FV, Kaplan BH: Functional versus structural social support and health care utilization in a family medicine outpatient practice.Medical Care. 1989,27:221–233.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. House JS, Landis KR, Umberson D: Social relationships and health.Science. 1988,241:540–544.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Seeman TE, Syme SL: Social networks and coronary artery disease: A comparison of the structure and function of social relations as predictors of disease.Psychosomatic Medicine. 1987,49:341–354.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Berkman LF: The role of social relations in health promotion.Psychosomatic Medicine. 1995,57:245–254.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Thoits PA: Stress, coping, and social support processes: Where are we? What next?Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1995,Extra Issue:53–79.

  42. Cohen S, Wills TA: Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis.Psychological Bulletin. 1985,98:310–357.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Cohen S, Syme LS (eds):Social Support and Health. New York: Academic Press, Inc., 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Bandura A:Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Perry CL, Baranowski T, Parcel GS: How individuals, environments, and health behavior interact: Social Learning Theory. In Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (eds),Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1990, 161–186.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Azjen I, Fishbein M:Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Carter WB: Health behavior as a rational process: Theory of Reasoned Action and Multiattribute Utility Theory. In Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (eds),Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1990, 63–91.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Janz NK, Becker MH: The Health Belief Model: A decade later.Health Education Quarterly. 1984,11:1–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Rosenstock I: The Health Belief Model: Explaining health behavior through expectancies. In Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (eds),Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1990, 39–62.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Bastani R, Marcus AC, Hollatz-Brown A: Screening mammography rates and barriers to use: A Los Angeles county survey.Preventive Medicine. 1991,20:350–363.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Breen N, Kessler L: Changes in the use of screening mammography: Evidence from the 1987 and 1990 National Health Interview Survey.American Journal of Public Health. 1994,84:62–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Centers for Disease Control: Use of mammography—United States.Morbitity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1990,39:621–630.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Champion VL: The relationship of selected variables to breast cancer detection behaviors in women 35 and older.Oncology Nursing Forum. 1991,18:733–739.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Israel BA: Social networks and health status: Linking theory, research, and practice.Patient counseling and Health Education. 1982,4:65–79.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Israel BA, Schurman SJ: Social support, control, and the stress process. In Glanz K, Marcus-Lewis F, Rimer BK (eds),Health Behavior and Health Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1990, 187–215.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Rimer BK, Kasper Keintz M, Kessler HR, Engstrom PF, Rosan JR: Why women resist mammography: Patient-related barriers.Radiology. 1989,172:243–246.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Fletcher SW: Whither scientific deliberation in health policy recommendations?New England Journal of Medicine. 1997,336:1180–1183.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Kaluzny AD, Rimer B, Harris R: The National Cancer Institute and guideline development: Lessons from the breast cancer screening controversy.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1994,86:901–902.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Baines CJ: Breast self-examination.Cancer. 1989,64:2661–2663.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. O’Malley MS, Fletcher SW: Screening for breast cancer with breast self-examination.Journal of the American Medical Association. 1987,16:2196–2203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. National Cancer Institute: Screening mammography: A missed clinical opportunity.Journal of the American Medical Association. 1990,264:54–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Seeman TE, Berkman LF, Blazer D, Rowe JW: Social ties and support and neuroendocrine function: The MacArthur Studies of Successful Aging.Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 1994,16:95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Murray DM:Design and Analysis of Group-Randomized Trials. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998, 241.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Allen JD, Sorensen G, Stoddard AM, Colditz G, Peterson K: Intention to have a mammogram in the future among women who have underused mammography in the past.Health Education and Behavior. 1998,25:474–488.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Fox SA, Stein JA: The effect of physician-patient communication on mammography utilization by different ethnic groups.Medical Care. 1991,29:1065–1082.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Horton JA, Romans MC, Cruess DF: Mammography Attitudes and Usage Study.Women’s Health Issues. 1992,2:180–186.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census:1990 Census of Population and Housing: Summary of Social, Economic and Housing Characteristics. 1990.

  68. Etzi S, Lane DS, Grimson R: The use of mammography vans by low-income women: The accuracy of self-reports.American Journal of Public Health. 1994,84:107–109.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Degnan D, Harris R, Ranmey J, et al: Measuring the use of mammography: Two methods compared.American Journal of Public Health. 1992,82:1386–1388.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. King ES, Rimer BK, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstrom P: How valid are mammography self-reports?American Journal of Public Health. 1990,80:1386–1388.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Zapka JG, Bigelow C, Hurley T, et al: Mammography use among sociodemographically diverse women: The accuracy of self-report.American Journal of Public Health. 1996,86:1016–1021.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Fowler FJ:Survey Research Methods. London: Sage Publications, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Suarez L, Nichols DC, Brady CA: Use of peer role models to increase Pap smear and mammography screening in Mexican-American and Black women.American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1993,9:290–296.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Sung JC, Blumenthal DS, Coates RJ, et al: Effect of a cancer screening intervention conducted by lay health workers among inner-city women.American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1997,13:51–57.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Eng E, Young R: Lay health advisors as community change agents.Journal of Family and Community Health. 1992,15:24–40.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Ramirez AG, McAlister AL: Mass media campaign—A Su Salud.Preventive Medicine. 1988,17:608–621.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Bird JA, McPhee SJ, Jenkins C, Fordham D: Three strategies to promote cancer screening.Medical Care. 1990,28:1005–1012.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Garr DR, Ornstein SM, Jenkins RG, Zemp LD: The effect of routine use of computer-generated preventive reminders in a clinical practice.American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1993,9:55–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Harris RP, O’Malley MS, Fletcher SW, Knight BP: Prompting physicians for preventive procedures: A five-year study of manual and computer reminders.American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1990,6:145–152.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Rimer BK, Ross E, Balshem A, Engstrom PF: The effect of a comprehensive breast screening program on self-reported mammography use by primary care physicians and women in a Health Maintenance Organization.Journal of the American Board of Family Practitioners. 1993,6:443–451.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Snell JL, Buck EL: Increasing cancer screening: A meta-analysis.Preventive Medicine. 1996,25:702–707.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Trock B, Rimer BK, King E, et al: Impact of an HMO-based intervention to increase mammography utilization.Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention. 1993,2:151–156.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Community-Based Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney Street, 02115, Boston, MA

    Jennifer Dacey Allen M.P.H., D.Sc. & Glorian Sorensen Ph.D., M.P.H.

  2. Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, USA

    Glorian Sorensen Ph.D., M.P.H., Karen E. Peterson D.Sc., R.D. & Graham Colditz M.B.B.S., Dr.Ph.

  3. University of Massachusetts School of Public Health, Massachusetts, USA

    Anne M. Stoddard D.Sc.

  4. Channing Laboratory, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, USA

    Graham Colditz M.B.B.S., Dr.Ph.

  5. Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA

    Graham Colditz M.B.B.S., Dr.Ph.

Authors
  1. Jennifer Dacey Allen M.P.H., D.Sc.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Glorian Sorensen Ph.D., M.P.H.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne M. Stoddard D.Sc.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Karen E. Peterson D.Sc., R.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Graham Colditz M.B.B.S., Dr.Ph.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Preparation of this manuscript was supported in part by a grant from the National Cancer Institute, grant number RO1 CA66038.

The authors are indebted to the other investigators and staff who participated in this project, including Judy Garber, Elizabeth Harden, Sonia Hauser, Mary K. Hunt, Ruth Lederman, Nancy Lightman, Sharon Longo, Jeb Mays, Steve Potter, Natania Remba, and Jane Weeks. In addition, we are grateful to the Service Employees International Union and the 27 worksites participating in this study.

About this article

Cite this article

Allen, J.D., Sorensen, G., Stoddard, A.M. et al. The relationship between social network characteristics and breast cancer screening practices among employed women. ann. behav. med. 21, 193–200 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02884833

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02884833

Keywords

Search

Navigation