Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population: A patient navigation intervention

Battaglia, Tracy A., Roloff, Kathryn, Posner, Michael A., Freund, Karen M.·2007·Cancer

Abstract

Delays in follow-up after cancer screening contribute to racial/ethnic disparities in cancer outcomes. We evaluated a patient navigator intervention among inner-city women with breast abnormalities. A full-time patient navigator supported patients using the care management model. Female patients 18 years and above, referred to an urban, hospital-based, diagnostic breast health practice from January to June 2000 (preintervention) and November 2001 to February 2003 (intervention), were studied. Timely follow-up was defined as arrival to diagnostic evaluation within 120 days from the date the original appointment was scheduled. Data were collected via computerized registration, medical records, and patient interview. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted, comparing preintervention and intervention groups, with propensity score analysis and time trend analysis to address the limitations of the pre-post design. 314 patients were scheduled preintervention; 1018, during the intervention. Overall, mean age was 44 years; 40% black, 36% non-Hispanic white, 14% Hispanic, 4% Asian, 5% other; 15% required an interpreter; 68% had no or only public insurance. Forty-four percent of referrals originated from a community health center, 34% from a hospital-based practice. During the intervention, 78% had timely follow-up versus 64% preintervention (P < .0001). In adjusted analyses, women in the intervention group had 39% greater odds of having timely follow-up (95% CI, 1.01-1.9). Timely follow-up in the adjusted model was associated with older age (P = .0003), having private insurance (P = .006), having an abnormal mammogram (P = .0001), and being referred from a hospital-based practice, as compared to a community health center (P = .003). Our data suggest a benefit of patient navigators in reducing delay in breast cancer care for poor and minority populations. Cancer 2007. (c) 2006 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.22354

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
Battaglia, T. A., Roloff, K., Posner, M. A., & Freund, K. M.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007
Volume
109
Issue
S2
Pages
359-367
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W1985417839
Cited by
264
References
2
FWCI
14.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population: A patient navigation intervention. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.22354
The paper
Battaglia, T. A., Roloff, K., Posner, M. A., & Freund, K. M. (2007). Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population: A patient navigation intervention. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.22354

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.