Does social disadvantage affect the validity of self-report for cervical cancer screening?

  • Lofters A
  • Moineddin R
  • Hwang S
 et al. 
  • 2

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • N/A

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

Objective: The aim was to review the international literature on the validity of self-report of cervical cancer screening, specifically of studies that made direct comparisons among women with and without social disadvantage, based on race/ethnicity, foreign-born status, language ability, income, or education. Method: The databases of Medline, EBM Reviews, and CINAHL from 1990 to 2011 were searched using relevant search terms. Articles eligible for data extraction documented the prevalence of cervical cancer screening based on both self-report and an objective measure for women both with and without at least one measure of social disadvantage. The report-to-record ratio, the ratio of the proportion of study subjects who report at least one screening test within a particular time frame to the proportion of study subjects who have a record of the same test within that time frame, was calculat ed for each subgroup. Results: Five studies met the extraction criteria. Subgroups were based on race/ethnicity, education, and income. In all studies, and across all subgroups, report-to-record ratios were greater than one, indicative of pervasive over-reporting. Conclusion: The findings suggest that objective measures should be used by policymakers, researchers, and public-health practitioners in place of self-report to accurately determine cervical cancer screening rates. © 2013 Lofters et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

Author-supplied keywords

  • Early detection of cancer
  • Pap test
  • Reproducibility of results
  • Vaginal smears
  • Validity
  • Vulnerable populations

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

  • A.K. Lofters

  • R. Moineddin

  • S.W. Hwang

  • R.H. Glazier

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free