Skip header and navigation

Refine By

45 records – page 1 of 5.

Source
CMAJ. 2002 Feb 5;166(3):299-300
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-5-2002
Author
Dalia L Rotstein
David A Alter
Dalis L Rotstein
Source
CMAJ. 2002 Feb 5;166(3):299-300
Date
Feb-5-2002
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis - prevention & control
Canada
Efficiency, Organizational
Female
Humans
Mass Screening - organization & administration
Middle Aged
Time and Motion Studies
Notes
Cites: Health Policy. 1996 Apr;36(1):17-3510172629
Cites: CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):277-8311517642
Cites: CMAJ. 1998 May 5;158(9):1151-39597966
Cites: Health Policy. 2000 May;52(1):15-3210899642
Cites: Br J Surg. 2000 Aug;87(8):1082-610931055
Erratum In: CMAJ 2002 Apr 30;166(9):1135Rotstein Dalis L [corrected to Rotstein Dalia L]
PubMed ID
11868633 View in PubMed
Less detail

[Anticancer propaganda: myth or reality?].

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature104400
Source
Vopr Onkol. 2014;60(1):96-101
Publication Type
Article
Date
2014
Author
E V Demin
V M Merabishvili
Source
Vopr Onkol. 2014;60(1):96-101
Date
2014
Language
Russian
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis - prevention & control
Early Detection of Cancer - history - trends
Female
Health Education - history - trends
Health Promotion - history - trends
History, 20th Century
History, 21st Century
History, Ancient
Humans
Mass Screening - history - trends
Neoplasms - diagnosis - history - mortality - prevention & control - psychology - therapy
Persuasive Communication
Primary prevention - methods
Propaganda
Russia - epidemiology
Survival Rate
Survivors - psychology
United States - epidemiology
Abstract
The authors raise a very important problem of anticancer propaganda aimed at the early detection of cancer to be solved nowadays by means of screening and constructive interaction between oncologists and the public. To increase the level of knowledge of the population in this area it is necessary to expand the range of its adequate awareness of tumor diseases. Only joint efforts can limit the destructive effect of cancer on people's minds, so that every person would be responsible for his own health, clearly understanding the advantages of early visit to a doctor. This once again highlights the need of educational work with the public, motivational nature of which allows strengthening the value of screening in the whole complex of measures to fight cancer.
PubMed ID
24772625 View in PubMed
Less detail

Applying the knowledge to action framework to plan a strategy for implementing breast cancer screening guidelines: an interprofessional perspective.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature113253
Source
J Cancer Educ. 2013 Sep;28(3):481-7
Publication Type
Article
Date
Sep-2013
Author
Sarah Munce
Monika Kastner
Heidi Cramm
Shalini Lal
Sarah-Maude Deschêne
Mohammad Auais
Dawn Stacey
Melissa Brouwers
Author Affiliation
Institute of Health Policy, Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. sarah.munce@utoronto.ca
Source
J Cancer Educ. 2013 Sep;28(3):481-7
Date
Sep-2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis - prevention & control
Canada
Clinical Competence - standards
Cooperative Behavior
Early Detection of Cancer - standards
Faculty
Female
Health Plan Implementation
Health services needs and demand
Humans
Information Dissemination
Neoplasm Staging
Practice Guidelines as Topic - standards
Prognosis
Translational Medical Research
Abstract
Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) interventions may be one solution to improving the uptake of clinical guidelines. IKT research initiatives are particularly relevant for breast cancer research and initiatives targeting the implementation of clinical guidelines and guideline implementation initiatives, where collaboration with an interdisciplinary team of practitioners, patients, caregivers, and policy makers is needed for producing optimum patient outcomes. The objective of this paper was to describe the process of developing an IKT strategy that could be used by guideline developers to improve the uptake of their new clinical practice guidelines on breast cancer screening. An interprofessional group of students as well as two faculty members met six times over three days at the KT Canada Summer Institute in 2011. The team used all of the phases of the action cycle in the Knowledge to Action Framework as an organizing framework. While the entire framework was used, the step involving assessing barriers to knowledge use was judged to be particularly relevant in anticipating implementation problems and being able to inform the specific KT interventions that would be appropriate to mitigate these challenges and to accomplish goals and outcomes. This activity also underscored the importance of group process and teamwork in IKT. We propose that an a priori assessment of barriers to knowledge use (i.e., level and corresponding barriers), along with the other phases of the Knowledge to Action Framework, is a strategic approach for KT strategy development, implementation, and evaluation planning and could be used in the future planning of KT strategies.
PubMed ID
23749437 View in PubMed
Less detail

The association between general practitioners' attitudes towards breast cancer screening and women's screening participation.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature123343
Source
BMC Cancer. 2012;12:254
Publication Type
Article
Date
2012
Author
Line Flytkjær Jensen
Thomas Ostersen Mukai
Berit Andersen
Peter Vedsted
Author Affiliation
The Research Unit for General Practice, Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 2, Aarhus C, Denmark. line.jensen@alm.au.dk
Source
BMC Cancer. 2012;12:254
Date
2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Attitude of Health Personnel
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis - prevention & control
Denmark
Early Detection of Cancer
Female
General Practitioners - psychology
Humans
Male
Mass Screening
Middle Aged
Patient Participation
Abstract
Breast cancer screening in Denmark is organised by the health services in the five regions. Although general practitioners (GPs) are not directly involved in the screening process, they are often the first point of contact to the health care system and thus play an important advisory role. No previous studies, in a health care setting like the Danish system, have investigated the association between GPs' attitudes towards breast cancer screening and women's participation in the screening programme.
Data on women's screening participation was obtained from the regional screening authorities. Data on GPs' attitudes towards breast cancer screening was taken from a previous survey among GPs in the Central Denmark Region. This study included women aged 50-69 years who were registered with a singlehanded GP who had participated in the survey.
The survey involved 67 singlehanded GPs with a total of 13,288 women on their lists. Five GPs (7%) had a negative attitude towards breast cancer screening. Among registered women, 81% participated in the first screening round. Multivariate analyses revealed that women registered with a GP with a negative attitude towards breast cancer screening were 17% (95% CI: 2-34%) more likely to be non-participants compared with women registered with a GP with a positive attitude towards breast cancer screening.
The GPs' attitudes may influence the participation rate even in a system where GPs are not directly involved in the screening process. However, further studies are needed to investigate this association.
Notes
Cites: Prev Med. 2000 Oct;31(4):417-2811006068
Cites: Eur J Cancer Prev. 2011 Jan;20 Suppl 1:S39-4121245680
Cites: J Am Board Fam Pract. 2001 Sep-Oct;14(5):352-6111572540
Cites: Lancet. 2001 Oct 20;358(9290):1340-211684218
Cites: Cancer Causes Control. 2002 Feb;13(1):73-8211899121
Cites: Eur J Cancer Prev. 2003 Jun;12(3):213-2212771560
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 2004 Apr 1;159(7):702-615033648
Cites: BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003 Oct 20;3:2114567763
Cites: J Gen Intern Med. 1997 Jan;12(1):34-439034944
Cites: J Med Screen. 1999;6(2):82-810444726
Cites: Cancer Causes Control. 2007 Feb;18(1):61-7017186422
Cites: J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2008 Nov;17(9):1477-9818954237
Cites: Cancer. 2009 Oct 15;115(20):4828-3819645031
Cites: Health Educ Behav. 2009 Dec;36(6):1012-2519233947
Cites: Cancer Causes Control. 2009 Oct;20(8):1339-5319449107
Cites: J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010 Mar;19(3):433-4120141384
Cites: Acta Oncol. 2010 Jun;49(5):532-4420491522
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Nov;124(2):509-1920364401
Cites: Lancet. 2011 Jan 8;377(9760):127-3821183212
Cites: Health Educ Behav. 2001 Apr;28(2):200-1611265829
PubMed ID
22708828 View in PubMed
Less detail

Breast cancer diagnosis: what are we waiting for?

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature193568
Source
CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):303-4
Publication Type
Article
Date
Aug-7-2001
Author
P. Rasuli
Author Affiliation
Department of Radiology, Ottawa Hospital-General Campus, 501 Smyth Rd., Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6. prasuli@ottawahospital.on.ca
Source
CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):303-4
Date
Aug-7-2001
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis - prevention & control
Canada
Efficiency, Organizational
Female
Health planning
Humans
Mass Screening - organization & administration
Time and Motion Studies
Notes
Cites: J Healthc Resour Manag. 1996 Sep;14(7):23-610161586
Cites: Radiographics. 1997 Sep-Oct;17(5):1233-529308112
Cites: Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2000 Apr;9(2):177-9810757841
Cites: Adv Anat Pathol. 2000 Jan;7(1):26-3510640199
Cites: CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):277-8311517642
Cites: Radiol Clin North Am. 2000 Jul;38(4):809-2310943279
Cites: Radiology. 2001 Mar;218(3):866-7211230668
Cites: CMAJ. 2001 Apr 17;164(8):1133-811338798
Comment On: CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):277-8311517642
PubMed ID
11517647 View in PubMed
Less detail

Breast cancer screening in Canada: a review.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature169969
Source
Can Assoc Radiol J. 2005 Dec;56(5):271-5
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-2005
Author
Nancy Wadden
Gregory P Doyle
Author Affiliation
Department of Diagnostic Imaging, St. Clare's Mercy Hospital, St. John's, NL.
Source
Can Assoc Radiol J. 2005 Dec;56(5):271-5
Date
Dec-2005
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Age Factors
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis - prevention & control - radiography
Canada
Carcinoma in Situ - diagnosis - radiography
Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - diagnosis - radiography
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Mammography - utilization
Mass Screening - organization & administration - standards
Middle Aged
Physical Examination
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Program Evaluation
Quality Assurance, Health Care
Time Factors
Abstract
Organized screening for breast cancer in Canada began in 1988 and has been implemented in all provinces and 2 of the 3 territories. Quality initiatives are promoted through national guidelines which detail best practices in various areas, including achieving quality through a client-service approach, recruitment and capacity, retention, quality of mammography, reporting, communication of results, follow-up and diagnostic workup, and program evaluation; it also offers detailed guidelines for the pathological examination and reporting of breast specimens. The Canadian Breast Cancer Data Base is a national breast cancer screening surveillance system whose objective is to collect information from provincial-screening programs. These data are used to monitor and evaluate the performance of programs and allow comparison with national and international results. A series of standardized performance indicators and targets for the evaluation of performance and quality of organized breast cancer screening programs have been developed from the data base. Although health care is a provincial responsibility in Canada, the collective reporting and comparison of results both nationally and internationally is beneficial in evaluating and refining both screening programs and individual radiologist performance. The results of Canadian performance indicators compare favourably with those of other well-established international screening programs. There are variations in performance indicators across the provinces and territories, but these differences are not extreme.
Notes
Comment In: Can Assoc Radiol J. 2006 Jun;57(3):192-316881479
Erratum In: Can Assoc Radiol J. 2006 Apr;57(2):67Doyle, Gregory P [added]
PubMed ID
16579020 View in PubMed
Less detail

Breast cancer screening--knowledge, attitudes and behaviours among Alberta women.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature215023
Source
AARN News Lett. 1995 Jun;51(6):28
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-1995

Breast cancer screening practices for women aged 35 to 49 and 70 and older.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature127753
Source
Can Fam Physician. 2012 Jan;58(1):e47-53
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-2012
Author
Nabila Kadaoui
Maryse Guay
Geneviève Baron
José St-Cerny
Jacques Lemaire
Author Affiliation
Université de Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. Nabila.kadaoui@usherbrooke.ca
Source
Can Fam Physician. 2012 Jan;58(1):e47-53
Date
Jan-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis - prevention & control - radiography
Canada
Early Detection of Cancer - statistics & numerical data
Female
General practitioners
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Humans
Mammography - statistics & numerical data
Middle Aged
Multivariate Analysis
Physician's Practice Patterns - statistics & numerical data
Questionnaires
Abstract
To describe physician practices with regard to opportunistic screening for breast cancer in women aged 35 to 49 years and 70 years of age and older, and to identify the determinants associated with the practice of prescribing screening mammography.
Postal survey.
Quebec.
Simple random sample of 1400 general practitioners practising in Quebec in 2009.
Five cancer screening practices among 4 types of female clientele and the factors influencing physicians in their practice of prescribing screening mammography.
The response rate was 36%. For women aged 35 to 49 years, more than 80% of physicians reported using practices judged adequate, except for the teaching of breast self-examination and referrals to genetic counseling (60% and 54%). For women 70 years of age and older with good life expectancy, only 50% of general practitioners prescribed screening mammography. For the 70 years of age and older age group without good life expectancy, for whom screening is not indicated, nearly half of physicians continued to do the clinical breast examination and more than one-third reviewed family history. The main determinants for the practice of prescribing mammography are a favourable attitude to screening, screening skills, peer support, belief in the efficacy of mammography, and sufficient knowledge of the issue and of recommendations.
Improvements are needed in the practice of teaching breast self-examination to women aged 35 to 49 years and referring them to genetic counseling, as well as in prescribing mammography for women 70 years of age and older who are in good health. Public health actions to improve these practices should focus on physician attitudes and skills and on communicating clearer recommendations.
Notes
Cites: Prev Med. 1999 Nov;29(5):391-40410564631
Cites: J Immigr Minor Health. 2008 Jun;10(3):239-4617653863
Cites: CMAJ. 2001 Jun 26;164(13):1837-4611450279
Cites: J Am Board Fam Pract. 2001 Sep-Oct;14(5):352-6111572540
Cites: Swiss Med Wkly. 2001 Jun 2;131(21-22):311-911584693
Cites: J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2003 Jan-Feb;12(1):61-7112639370
Cites: Cancer. 2003 Nov 1;98(9):1811-2114584062
Cites: Health Educ Q. 1992 Summer;19(2):157-751618625
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 1994 Apr 1;120(7):602-88117000
Cites: Radiology. 1997 May;203(2):335-89114084
Cites: Arch Fam Med. 1997 Nov-Dec;6(6):543-89371047
Cites: Cancer Pract. 1998 Nov-Dec;6(6):325-329824423
Cites: J Cancer Educ. 2005 Spring;20(1):34-815876180
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 2005 Sep 6;143(5):355-6116144894
Cites: Aust Fam Physician. 2005 Oct;34(10):851-516217572
Cites: Ann Oncol. 2006 Feb;17(2):211-616291586
Cites: J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2006 Aug;28(8):728-3017022914
Cites: Ann Oncol. 2007 Jun;18(6):991-617351258
Cites: Eur J Cancer Prev. 2008 Feb;17(1):48-5318090910
Cites: J Immigr Minor Health. 2008 Jun;10(3):255-6117647104
Cites: J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2001 Mar;10(2):201-811268303
PubMed ID
22267639 View in PubMed
Less detail

45 records – page 1 of 5.