Validation of a susceptibility, benefits, and barrier scale for mammography screening among Peruvian women: a cross-sectional study

被引:11
|
作者
Huaman, Moises A. [1 ]
Kamimura-Nishimura, Kelly I. [2 ]
Kanamori, Mariano [3 ]
Siu, Alejandro [1 ,4 ]
Lescano, Andres G. [1 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru
[2] Bronx Lebanon Hosp Ctr, Dept Pediat, New York, NY USA
[3] Univ Maryland, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
[4] Hosp Nacl Arzobispo Loayza, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Lima, Peru
[5] USN, Dept Parasitol, Naval Med Res Unit 6, Lima, Peru
[6] USN, Publ Hlth Training Program, Naval Med Res Unit 6, Lima, Peru
来源
BMC WOMENS HEALTH | 2011年 / 11卷
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
BREAST-CANCER; HISPANIC WOMEN; HEALTH; BELIEFS; ADAPTATION; INTERVENTIONS; WHITE; BLACK;
D O I
10.1186/1472-6874-11-54
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Perceived beliefs about breast cancer and breast cancer screening are important predictors for mammography utilization. This study adapted and validated the Champion's scale in Peru. This scale measures perceived susceptibility for breast cancer and perceived benefits and barriers for mammography. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among women ages 40 to 65 attending outpatient gynecology services in a public hospital in Peru. A group of experts developed and pre-tested a Spanish version of the Champion's scale to assess its comprehensibility (N = 20). Factor analysis, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability analyses were performed (N = 285). Concurrent validity compared scores from participants who had a mammogram and those who did not have it in the previous 15 months. T-test and multiple regression analysis adjusting for socio-demographic factors, mammography knowledge and other preventive behaviors were performed. Results: The construct validity and reliability were optimal. Cronbach-Alpha coefficients were 0.75 (susceptibility), 0.72 (benefits) and 0.86 (barriers). Concurrent validity analysis showed an association between barriers and mammography screening use in bivariate (22.3 +/- 6.7 vs. 30.2 +/- 7.6; p < 0.001) and multiple regression analysis (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.18-0.43). Ages 50-60 years (OR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.19-4.65), history of prior Papanicolaou test (OR = 3.69, 95% CI = 1.84-7.40), and knowledge about breast cancer and mammography (OR = 3.69, 95% CI = 1.84-7.40) were also independently associated with mammography screening use. Conclusion: Concurrent validity analysis showed that the Champion's scale has important limitations for assessing perceived susceptibility for breast cancer and perceived benefits for mammography among Peruvian women. There is still a need for developing valid and reliable instruments for measuring perceived beliefs about breast cancer and mammography screening among Peruvian women.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Validation of a susceptibility, benefits, and barrier scale for mammography screening among Peruvian women: a cross-sectional study
    Moises A Huaman
    Kelly I Kamimura-Nishimura
    Mariano Kanamori
    Alejandro Siu
    Andres G Lescano
    [J]. BMC Women's Health, 11
  • [2] Factors associated with mammography screening among Reunionese women : a cross-sectional study
    Deneche, Imene
    Touzani, Rajae
    Bouhnik, Anne Deborah
    Rey, Dominique
    Bendiane, Marc Karim
    Chirpaz, Emmanuel
    [J]. REVUE D EPIDEMIOLOGIE ET DE SANTE PUBLIQUE, 2022, 70 (03): : 117 - 122
  • [3] Screening of Breast among Women: A Cross-Sectional Study in Nepal
    Shah, Sangam
    Dahal, Krishna
    Pangeni, Paras
    Niroula, Sandhya
    Paudel, Kiran
    Subedi, Prativa
    Dhakal, Sarita
    Mandal, Prince
    Rawal, Laba
    Bhatta, Nikita
    Shrestha, Anisha
    Bhattarai, Ganesh
    Bhandari, Pragya
    [J]. BREAST JOURNAL, 2024, 2024
  • [4] Are benefits and harms in mammography screening given equal attention in scientific articles? A cross-sectional study
    Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
    Anders Klahn
    Peter C Gøtzsche
    [J]. BMC Medicine, 5
  • [5] Are benefits and harms in mammography screening given equal attention in scientific articles? A cross-sectional study
    Jorgensen, Karsten Juhl
    Klahn, Anders
    Gotzsche, Peter C.
    [J]. BMC MEDICINE, 2007, 5 (1)
  • [6] Revised susceptibility, benefits, and barriers scale for mammography screening
    Champion, VL
    [J]. RESEARCH IN NURSING & HEALTH, 1999, 22 (04) : 341 - 348
  • [7] Baseline Mammography: What Is It and Why Is It Important? A Cross-Sectional Survey of Women Undergoing Screening Mammography
    Horsley, Robert K.
    Kling, Juliana M.
    Vegunta, Suneela
    Lorans, Roxanne
    Temkit, H'hamed
    Patel, Bhavika K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2019, 16 (02) : 164 - 169
  • [8] Lifetime utilization of mammography among Maltese women: a cross-sectional survey
    Marmara, Danika
    Marmara, Vincent
    Hubbard, Gill
    [J]. BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2018, 18
  • [9] Lifetime utilization of mammography among Maltese women: a cross-sectional survey
    Danika Marmarà
    Vincent Marmarà
    Gill Hubbard
    [J]. BMC Public Health, 18
  • [10] Predictors of Screening Mammography Among Asian Indian American Women: A Cross-Sectional Study in the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area
    Somanchi, Meena
    Juon, Hee-Soon
    Rimal, Rajiv
    [J]. JOURNAL OF WOMENS HEALTH, 2010, 19 (03) : 433 - 441