• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of amjphAmerican Journal of Public Health Web SiteAmerican Public Health Association Web SiteSubmissionsSubscriptionsAbout Us
Am J Public Health. 1994 January; 84(1): 43–49.
PMCID: PMC1614921

Physicians' recommendations for mammography: do tailored messages make a difference?

Abstract

OBJECTIVES. Message tailoring, based on individual needs and circumstances, is commonly used to enhance face-to-face patient counseling. Only recently has individual tailoring become feasible for printed messages. This study sought to determine whether printed tailored recommendations addressing women's specific screening and risk status and perceptions about breast cancer and mammography are more effective than standardized printed recommendations. METHODS. Computer-assisted telephone interviews were conducted with 435 women, aged 40 to 65 years, who had visited family practice groups within the previous 2 years. Subjects were randomly allocated to receive individually tailored or standardized mammography recommendation letters mailed from physicians to patients' homes. Follow-up interviews were conducted 8 months later. RESULTS. Tailored letter recipients were more likely to remember and to have read more of their letters than standardized version recipients. After controlling for baseline status, tailored letter receipt was associated with more favorable follow-up mammography status for women with incomes below $26,000 and for Black women. CONCLUSIONS. Tailored messages are a more effective medium for physicians' mammography recommendations; tailoring may be especially important for women of low socioeconomic status.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (2.9M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Shapiro S. Evidence on screening for breast cancer from a randomized trial. Cancer. 1977 Jun;39(6 Suppl):2772–2782. [PubMed]
  • Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L, Roeser R. Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1982 Aug;69(2):349–355. [PubMed]
  • Tabár L, Faberberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L. What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer. 1987 May;55(5):547–551. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Tabár L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, Baldetorp L, Holmberg LH, Gröntoft O, Ljungquist U, Lundström B, Månson JC, Eklund G, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet. 1985 Apr 13;1(8433):829–832. [PubMed]
  • Collette HJ, Day NE, Rombach JJ, de Waard F. Evaluation of screening for breast cancer in a non-randomised study (the DOM project) by means of a case-control study. Lancet. 1984 Jun 2;1(8388):1224–1226. [PubMed]
  • Palli D, Del Turco MR, Buiatti E, Carli S, Ciatto S, Toscani L, Maltoni G. A case-control study of the efficacy of a non-randomized breast cancer screening program in Florence (Italy). Int J Cancer. 1986 Oct 15;38(4):501–504. [PubMed]
  • Verbeek AL, Hendriks JH, Holland R, Mravunac M, Sturmans F, Day NE. Reduction of breast cancer mortality through mass screening with modern mammography. First results of the Nijmegen project, 1975-1981. Lancet. 1984 Jun 2;1(8388):1222–1224. [PubMed]
  • Peeters PH, Verbeek AL, Hendriks JH, Holland R, Mravunac M. The predictive value of positive test results in screening for breast cancer by mammography in the Nijmegen programme. Br J Cancer. 1987 Nov;56(5):667–671. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Seidman H, Gelb SK, Silverberg E, LaVerda N, Lubera JA. Survival experience in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. CA Cancer J Clin. 1987 Sep-Oct;37(5):258–290. [PubMed]
  • Morrison AS, Brisson J, Khalid N. Breast cancer incidence and mortality in the breast cancer detection demonstration project [published errtum appears in J Natl Cancer Inst 1989 Oct 4;81(19):1513]. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1988 Dec 7;80(19):1540–1547. [PubMed]
  • Zapka JG, Stoddard AM, Costanza ME, Greene HL. Breast cancer screening by mammography: utilization and associated factors. Am J Public Health. 1989 Nov;79(11):1499–1502. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Maclean U, Sinfield D, Klein S, Harnden B. Women who decline breast screening. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1984 Dec;38(4):278–283. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Coll PP, O'Connor PJ, Crabtree BF, Besdine RW. Effects of age, education, and physician advice on utilization of screening mammography. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1989 Oct;37(10):957–962. [PubMed]
  • Rutledge DN, Hartmann WH, Kinman PO, Winfield AC. Exploration of factors affecting mammography behaviors. Prev Med. 1988 Jul;17(4):412–422. [PubMed]
  • Tippy P, Falvo DR, Woehlke P. Fee structure as a determinant of patient's choice to undergo mammography. Fam Pract Res J. 1989 Fall-Winter;9(1):43–51. [PubMed]
  • Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983 Jun;51(3):390–395. [PubMed]
  • Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, DiClemente CC, Fava J. Measuring processes of change: applications to the cessation of smoking. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988 Aug;56(4):520–528. [PubMed]
  • Prochaska JO, Goldstein MG. Process of smoking cessation. Implications for clinicians. Clin Chest Med. 1991 Dec;12(4):727–735. [PubMed]
  • DiClemente CC, Hughes SO. Stages of change profiles in outpatient alcoholism treatment. J Subst Abuse. 1990;2(2):217–235. [PubMed]
  • O'Connell D, Velicer WF. A decisional balance measure and the stages of change model for weight loss. Int J Addict. 1988 Jul;23(7):729–750. [PubMed]
  • Rakowski W, Dube CE, Marcus BH, Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Abrams DB. Assessing elements of women's decisions about mammography. Health Psychol. 1992;11(2):111–118. [PubMed]
  • Calnan MW, Moss S, Chamberlain J. Explaining attendance at a breast-screening clinic. Patient Educ Couns. 1985 Mar;7(1):87–96. [PubMed]
  • Burack RC, Liang J. The acceptance and completion of mammography by older black women. Am J Public Health. 1989 Jun;79(6):721–726. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lane DS, Fine HL. Compliance with mammography referrals. Implications for breast cancer screening. N Y State J Med. 1983 Feb;83(2):173–176. [PubMed]
  • Kruse J, Phillips DM. Factors influencing women's decision to undergo mammography. Obstet Gynecol. 1987 Nov;70(5):744–748. [PubMed]
  • Lerman C, Rimer B, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstrom PF. Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Prev Med. 1990 May;19(3):279–290. [PubMed]
  • Wolosin RJ. The experience of screening mammography. J Fam Pract. 1989 Nov;29(5):499–502. [PubMed]
  • Smith RA, Haynes S. Barriers to screening for breast cancer. Cancer. 1992 Apr 1;69(7 Suppl):1968–1978. [PubMed]

Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

  • Cited in Books
    Cited in Books
    PubMed Central articles cited in books
  • PubMed
    PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...