Journals / Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care / 2020 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3

Community-Based Cancer Screening: Reaching The Target Population

Pages
368–376
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Those numbers increased to 1271 and 1012, respectively.Conclusion:Community-based cancer screening programs are much more successful to reach the target population although single women, LGBT individuals, “working class” are still the missing parts of the puzzle.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective:The aim of this study is to determine the risk factors and the results of the community-based screening program of the women who attended the Cancer Early Diagnosis, Screening, and Education Center between 2005-2011.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data of the women who attend to cancer screening center between 2005-2011 years for breast cancer and cervical cancer screening program were collected retrospectively and evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Those numbers increased to 1271 and 1012, respectively.Conclusion:Community-based cancer screening programs are much more successful to reach the target population although single women, LGBT individuals, “working class” are still the missing parts of the puzzle.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2005-2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective:The aim of this study is to determine the risk factors and the results of the community-based screening program of the women who attended the Cancer Early Diagnosis, Screening, and Education Center between 2005-2011. Methods:This study was planned on a descriptive design. Data of the women who attend to cancer screening center between 2005-2011 years for breast cancer and cervical cancer screening program were collected retrospectively and evaluated. Incomplete forms were excluded. Results:Research has been completed by the records of 3162 women. The age of the study group was between 25-69 years old. The majority of them has been educated for 5 years and/or less, or not educated (89%), more than one-third of patients had more than four birth(38%), the breastfeeding rate was high (93.6%), the oral contraceptive drugs and HRT medication usage ratios were low (7.2%, 7.2%), respectively), the smoking rate was low (14.9%). The number of women who consulted for cervix cancer screening was 215 in 2008 and 142 for breast cancer screening; by the end of June 2011. Those numbers increased to 1271 and 1012, respectively.Conclusion:Community-based cancer screening programs are much more successful to reach the target population although single women, LGBT individuals, “working class” are still the missing parts of the puzzle.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖKDEMİR, Ö., KARTAL, M. (2020). Community-Based Cancer Screening: Reaching The Target Population. Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3, 368–376. https://ajindex.com/articles/371260

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet‐Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2015
  2. 65(2):87-108. 2.Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2019. 3.Keskin OÖ, Çağlayan Ç. The Relationship Between Participation in Mammography Screening Program and Health Literacy. Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care.13(4):448-456. 4.Gültekin M, Boztaş G. Türkiye kanser istatistikleri. Sağlık Bakanlığı, Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu. 2014
  3. Houssami N, Irwig L, Ciatto S. Radiological surveillance of interval breast cancers in screening programmes. The Lancet. Oncology. Mar 2006
  4. 7(3):259-265. 6.Bakanlığı TCS. Türkiye Kadın Sağlığı Araştırması. Ocak2014. 7.Harman Ö.Hacettepe Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Medikal Onkoloji Bölümü'ne başvuran meme kanserli hastalarda risk faktörlerinin dağılımı [Uzmanlık Tezi]. Ankara:, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi,
  5. Haydaroğlu A, Bölükbaşı Y, Özsaran Z. Ege Üniversitesi’nde kanser kayıt analizleri: 34134 olgunun değerlendirmesi. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi. 2007
  6. 22(1):22-28. 9.www.tuik.gov.tr/. İstatistiklerle Türkiye. www.tuik.gov.tr/. Accessed 19.11.2015, 2015. 10.Sabik LM, Tarazi WW, Hochhalter S, Dahman B, Bradley CJ. Medicaid Expansions and Cervical Cancer Screening for Low‐Income Women. Health services research. 2017. 11.Mokdad AH, Marks JS, StroupDF, Gerberding JL. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000. Jama. Mar 10 2004
  7. 291(10):1238-1245. 12.Başaran S. Cumhuriyet Dönemi Rize Nüfusu. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2020
  8. 30(1):485-503. 13.Çelik GO, Malak AT, Öztürk Z, Yilmaz D. Menapoz Sonrası Dönemdeki Kadınların Kendi Kendine Meme Muayenesini Uygulama, Mamografi Çektirme ve Pap Smear Yaptırma Durumalrının İncelenmesi. AJCI. 2009
  9. 3(3):159-163. 14.Ozmen V, Nilufer Ozaydin A, Cabioglu N, et al. Survey on a mammographic screening program in Istanbul, Turkey. The breast journal. May-Jun 2011
  10. 17(3):260-267. 15.Özmen V. Breast cancer screening: current controversies. J Breast Health. 2011
  11. Dilek D. Türkiye'de Tarım Sektöründe, Kadın. Istanbul: Social Sciences, MarmaraUniversity
  12. Rakel RE, Rakel D. Textbook of family medicine. 8th ed. ed: Elsevier Health Sciences
  13. van Leeuwen AW, de Nooijer P, Hop WC. Screening for cervical carcinoma. Cancer. Oct 25 2005
  14. 105(5):270-276. 19.Son BH, Kwak BS, Kim JK, et al. Changing patterns in the clinical characteristics of Ko