Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Communicating with women about mammography

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background/Methods. We report survey results of the types of tools used to communicate with women about breast cancer screening and the content areas included in each tool for member countries of the International Breast Cancer Screening Network (IBSN).Results. In addition to using pamphlets and invitation letters, new technologies are being used such as the Internet which allows for easy updating of information and can provide interactive modules. Several countries have addressed the needs of specific populations such as indigenous populations or blind women. All countries provide basic information, although they do not provide all the same information.Conclusion. More research is needed to understand what women need to make an informed decision about mammography and to learn what the best modalities are to provide this information.

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. Fletcher SW, Black W, Harris R, Rimer BK, Shapiro S. Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer [see comment]. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1993;85:1644–1656.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ballard-Barbash R, Klabunde C, Paci E, et al. Breast cancer screening in 21 countries: delivery of services, notification of results and outcomes ascertainment. Eur J Cancer Prev. 1999;8:417–426.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brown JB, Carroll J, Boon H, Marmoreo J. Women’s decision-making about their health care: views over the life cycle. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;48:225–231.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Edeards A, Unigwe S, Elwyn G, Hood K. Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about entering screening programs (Cochrane Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(1):CD001865.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gotzsche PC, Olsen O. Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? [see comment]. Lancet. 2000;355:129–134.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Holmes-Rovner M, Charles S. The mammography screening controversy: who and what is heard in the press? Patient Education & Counseling. 2003;51:75–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Briss P, Rimer B, Reilley B, et al. Promoting informed decisions about cancer screening in communities and healthcare systems. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:67–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sheridan SL, Harris RP, Woolf SH, for the Shared Decision-Making Workgroup of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:56–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jepson RG, Forbes CA, Sowden AJ, Lewis RA. Increasing informed uptake and non-uptake of screening: evidence from a systematic review. Health Expect. 2001;4:116–126.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. O’Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V, et al. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ. 1999;319:731–734.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Harris R. Variation of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening with age. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;(22):139–143.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Zapka J, Geller B, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Print Information to Inform Decisions about Mammography Screening Participation in 16 Countries with Population-Based Programs. Patient Educ Couns, 2006;63(1–2):126–137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. NCI, International Breast Cancer Screening Network http:// appliedresearch.cancer.gov/ibsn/.Last accessed December 2004.

  14. Entwist V. The potential contribution of decision aids to screening programmes. Health Expect. 2001;4:109–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jorgensen K, Gotzsche P. Presentation on websites of possible benefits and harms from screening for breast cancer: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2004;328:148.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lewis ML, Corcoran-Perry SA, Narayan SM, Lally RM. Women’s approaches to decision making about mammography. Cancer Nurs. 1999;22:380–388.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sciamanna C, Diaz J, Myne P. Patient attitudes toward using computers to improve health services delivery. BMC Health Serv Res. 2002;2:19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rimer BK, Halabi S, Sugg Skinner C, et al. Effects of a mammography decision-making intervention at 12 and 24 months. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22:247–257.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health. Wired for Health and Well-Being: The Emergence of Interactive Health Communication. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, US Government Printing Office, April 1999. www.health.gov/scipich/pubs/finalreport.htm. Last accessed September, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Domenighetti G, D’Avanzo B, Egger M, et al. Women’s perception of the benefits of mammography screening: population-based survey in four countries. Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32:816–821.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bulliard J, Levi F. Women’s perception of mammography screening. Int J Epidemiol. 2004;33:1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Thornton H, Edwards A, Baum M. Women need better information about routine mammography. BMJ. 2003;327:101–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Berta M. Geller EDD

    Present address: Health Promotion Research and the Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, 1 South Prospect Street, 05401-3444, Burlington, VT

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Massachusetts, USA

    Jane Zapka SCD

  2. The Cancer Registry of Norway, Norway

    Solveig S.-H. Hofvind MSC

  3. Ministry of Health, Luxembourg

    Astrid Scharpantgen RN, MPH

  4. CPO Peimonte, Turin, Italy

    Livia Giordano MD

  5. Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan

    Noriaki Ohuchi MD, PHD

  6. National Cancer Institute, U.S.

    Rachel Ballard-Barbash MD, MPH

Authors
  1. Berta M. Geller EDD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jane Zapka SCD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Solveig S.-H. Hofvind MSC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Astrid Scharpantgen RN, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Livia Giordano MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Noriaki Ohuchi MD, PHD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rachel Ballard-Barbash MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Berta M. Geller EDD.

Additional information

This study was funded by the National Cancer Institute in the U.S. however, all opinions and findings are the sole responsibility of the authors. The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Government.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Geller, B.M., Zapka, J., Hofvind, S.SH. et al. Communicating with women about mammography. J Canc Educ 22, 25–31 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03174371

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03174371

Keywords

Search

Navigation