A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The impact of reminder letters on attendance for breast cancer screening. | LitMetric

The impact of reminder letters on attendance for breast cancer screening.

Ir J Med Sci

Eastern Health Board, Public Health Department, Dr. Steevens' Hospital, Dublin 8.

Published: May 1999

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study analyzed the effectiveness of sending additional postal invitations for mammographic screening to women aged 50-64 in North Dublin.
  • A significant response increase was observed, with the first invitation yielding a 60.7% response rate, followed by 17.9% from the second and 7.6% from the third.
  • Women with private medical insurance and those aged 55-64 were more likely to respond, leading to the conclusion that sending a second invitation is beneficial, while a third is not cost-effective.

Article Abstract

Objective: The aims of this investigation was to analyse the response to second and third postal invitations from a group of patients previously invited for mammographic screening and to identify any demographic differences between responders and non-responders.

Subjects: The subjects were females aged 50-64 yr resident in 6 adjacent District Electoral Divisions (DEDs) in North Dublin where screening had not been carried out prior to the study.

Method: Non-responders to an invitation for screening were re-invited by computer-generated letter to attend for screening 6 weeks after issue of the first invitation and a final invitation was issued at 12 weeks. Data sources used for the project register were the Eastern Health Board General Medical Services data base (GMS), Voluntary Health Insurance Board (VHI) data and self-registration.

Results: There were 1,310 females in the target age group who were eligible for screening. The response rate to the first invitation was 60.7 per cent. Issue of second invitation increased the response rate by 17.9 per cent. A third invitation increased the response rate by a further 7.6 per cent. Those with private medical insurance were more likely to respond to the first and third invitations. The was no difference in response rate to the second invitation for those with and without private insurance. Women aged 55-64 were more likely to respond to first, second or third invitations than those aged less than 55 yr.

Conclusions: Issue of second mailed invitations to women in the target age for mammography screening is cost-effective and should be incorporated into routine policy. Response to third invitations is not cost-effective.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02939577DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

response rate
16
third invitations
12
second third
8
target age
8
issue second
8
second invitation
8
invitation increased
8
increased response
8
screening
7
invitation
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!