Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (18)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Edwards, N.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Edwards, N.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Age and Ageing, Vol 29, 131-135, Copyright © 2000 by British Geriatrics Society


ARTICLES

Uptake of breast cancer screening in older women

N Edwards and D Jones
University Department of Geriatric Medicine, Glan Clwyd Hospital, Rhyl, Denbighshire, North Wales LL18 5UJ, UK; University Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Wales College of Medicine, Academic Centre, Llandough Hospital, Penlan Road, Cardiff, South Glamorgan CF64 2XX, UK; Corresponding author; Fax: (+44) 1745 534668

Objectives. To determine breast screening uptake in older women and to ascertain from previous non-attenders whether they would accept screening if invited.Design. A random sample of older women randomly selected from three Family Health Service Authorities were interviewed in their homes.Participants. 1604 women aged 65 years and over living at home, a response rate of 94%.Results. 120 respondents (8%) had previously been screened. Rates were higher among those who were married, separated or divorced than those who were single (P<0.01). Of those who had not previously been screened, 742 (50%) reported that they would attend if invited. Age influenced potential attendance: 67% of those aged 65-69 would accept compared with 27% of those aged 80 and over (P<0.0001). Future attenders were significantly more likely to belong to the upper social class and to be currently married, and were significantly less likely to be disabled or depressed, but more likely to be anxious (P<0.05).Conclusion. It is unjustifiable to exclude women over 65 from breast screening on the basis of assumed low uptake rates. Certain categories of women - such as those who were physically disabled, depressed, single or from lower social classes - could be targeted to achieve maximum uptake rates.Keywords: breast cancer, mortality, screening
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
N. S. Consedine, A. H. Morgenstern, E. Kudadjie-Gyamfi, C. Magai, and A. I. Neugut
Prostate cancer screening behavior in men from seven ethnic groups: the fear factor.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., February 1, 2006; 15(2): 228 - 237.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Int J EpidemiolHome page
S. Lee, E. Cho, F. Grodstein, I. Kawachi, F. B Hu, and G. A Colditz
Effects of marital transitions on changes in dietary and other health behaviours in US women
Int. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2005; 34(1): 69 - 78.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
N. S. Consedine, C. Magai, Y. S. Krivoshekova, L. Ryzewicz, and A. I. Neugut
Fear, Anxiety, Worry, and Breast Cancer Screening Behavior: A Critical Review
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2004; 13(4): 501 - 510.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Fam PractHome page
T. J Harris, D. G Cook, S. Shah, C. R Victor, S. DeWilde, C. Beighton, and E. Rink
Mammography uptake predictors in older women
Fam. Pract., December 1, 2002; 19(6): 661 - 664.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.