Cited by 3Women's cancer prevention and managementCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

Limitations in Correspondence Programs for Cervical Cancer Screening: Who Are the Women We Are Missing?

Clark, Mitchell, Lee, Alex, Kupets, Rachel·2019·Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

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

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jogc.2018.11.034

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?

  • 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].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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