Limitations in Correspondence Programs for Cervical Cancer Screening: Who Are the Women We Are Missing?
Abstract
Objective This study sought to identify factors associated with gaps in the correspondence program and the characteristics of those women who are not reached with a mailed invitation to screening within an organized cervical cancer screening program. Methods This population-based, retrospective observational study examined the factors associated with failed correspondence mailings as part of the Ontario cervical cancer screening program. Administrative databases were used to identify eligible women who were overdue for screening or never screened yet did not receive an invitation to screening as a result of a failed mailing. These women were further characterized on the basis of age, affiliation with a primary care physician, and use of other health services (Canadian Task Force Classification II-2). Results A total of 1 350 425 women were eligible, of whom 1 064 637 had a successful mailing (78%). Women who were overdue for screening and who had a failed correspondence were more likely to be younger than 50 (72.5%) and associated with a primary care physician (61.2%), and 66.7% had three or more health care encounters in the preceding 3 years. Underscreened and never-screened women were also more likely to be younger than 50, but only 15% were associated with a primary care physician and only 18.2% had health care encounters in the previous 3 years. Conclusion This is one of the first studies to evaluate the incidence of failed mailings within correspondence in organized scr…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Patient relocation and mailing issues hinder timely medical care delivery, as critical information such as regular or follow-up screening notifications may not be transmitted efficiently or accurately to the patients, increasing errors due to missing information.
“Patient relocation and mailing issues also hinder timely medical care delivery, as critical information such as regular or follow-up screening notifications may not be transmitted efficiently or accurately to the patients, increasing errors due to missing information [46].”
From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [46]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors
Yen, C., Epling, J. W., Rockwell, M., & Vaughn-Cooke, M. (2026) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics16020347 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Clark, M., Lee, A., & Kupets, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Cancer Care Ontario (CA)
- Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Clark, Mitchell
- Venue
- Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-10
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1410-1415
- ISSN
- 1701-2163 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2917437655
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 0.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
- Cancer Care Ontario
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
- Keywords
- cervical cancer screening, organized screening programs, underscreened women, health care utilization, young women
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Female, Health Services, Humans, Middle Aged, Ontario, Patient Compliance, Postal Service, Primary Health Care, Retrospective Studies, Vaginal Smears, Correspondence as Topic, Reminder Systems, Early Detection of Cancer, Young Adult, Papanicolaou Test
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