Cited by 41Women's cancer prevention and managementGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Breast Cancer Screening Paved with Good Intentions: Application of the Information–Motivation–Behavioral Skills Model to Racial/Ethnic Minority Women

Talley, Costellia H., Yang, Lihong, Williams, Karen Patricia·2017·Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health

Abstract

Racial/ethnic minority women experience disparities in breast cancer. Studies suggest that this may be partly related to later stage of diagnosis. Adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines is frequently lower in racial/ethnic minority populations, which may contribute to this disparity. The purpose of this study was to examine the predictors of intentions to obtain breast cancer screening based on established guidelines using the information-motivation-behavioral skills model. Data for this study were obtained from the community-based Kin Keeper SM Cancer Prevention Intervention study and included 278 racial/ethnic minority women (Black = 138; Latina = 68; Arab = 80). Data were collected between 2009 and 2010 and analyzed in 2013. Structural equation models were tested to examining the effects of functional breast cancer literacy, motivation, and breast cancer screening behavior. Motivation was significantly associated with breast cancer screening. Breast cancer literacy (information) is positively associated with breast cancer screening. The findings indicate that the higher the level of breast cancer literacy and the more motivated patients are, the more likely they are to be screened. In addition, there was a significant association between the covariate race and other model constructs. Functional breast cancer literacy and motivation interventions are important factors to consider when designing breast cancer screening interventions in racial/ethnic minority women.…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10903-016-0355-9

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Talley, C. H., Yang, L., & Williams, K. P.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Talley, Costellia H.
Venue
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
Published
2016-02-06
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
1362-1371
ISSN
  • 1557-1912 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1920
OpenAlex
W2272291909
Cited by
41
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3
FWCI
2.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health National Institute of Nursing Research (R21NR010366)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
breast cancer screening, minority women, information-motivation-behavioral skills model, motivation, screening adherence, health disparities, Black women, Hispanic women, Arab women, cancer prevention interventions, cultural factors in health behavior
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Black or African American, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Goals, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Mammography, Michigan, Middle Aged, Minority Groups, Motivation, Arabs, Intention, Racial Groups, Early Detection of Cancer, Health Literacy

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