IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v9y2012i5p1836-1845d17678.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient Follow-Up After Participating in a Beach-Based Skin Cancer Screening Program

Author

Listed:
  • Mary L. Greaney

    (Center for Community-Based Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA)

  • Elaine Puleo

    (Department of Public Health, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA)

  • Alan C. Geller

    (Department of Society, Human Development & Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

  • Stephanie W. Hu

    (New York University Medical Center, New York, NY, 10016, USA)

  • Andrew E. Werchniak

    (Department of Dermatology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

  • Susan DeCristofaro

    (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA)

  • Karen M. Emmons

    (Center for Community-Based Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA
    Department of Society, Human Development & Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

Abstract

Many skin cancer screenings occur in non-traditional community settings, with the beach being an important setting due to beachgoers being at high risk for skin cancer. This study is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial of a skin cancer intervention in which participants (n = 312) had a full-body skin examination by a clinician and received a presumptive diagnosis (abnormal finding, no abnormal finding). Participants’ pursuit of follow-up was assessed post-intervention (n = 283). Analyses examined: (1) participant’s recall of screening results; and (2) whether cognitive and behavioral variables were associated with follow-up being as advised. Just 12% of participants (36/312) did not correctly recall the results of their skin examination. One-third (33%, 93/283) of participants’ follow-up was classified as being not as advised (recommend follow-up not pursued, unadvised follow-up pursued). Among participants whose follow-up was not as advised, 71% (66/93) did not seek recommended care. None of the measured behavioral and cognitive variables were significantly associated with recall of screening examination results or whether follow-up was as advised. Research is needed to determine what factors are associated with follow-up being as advised and to develop messages that increase receipt of advised follow-up care.

Suggested Citation

  • Mary L. Greaney & Elaine Puleo & Alan C. Geller & Stephanie W. Hu & Andrew E. Werchniak & Susan DeCristofaro & Karen M. Emmons, 2012. "Patient Follow-Up After Participating in a Beach-Based Skin Cancer Screening Program," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-10, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:9:y:2012:i:5:p:1836-1845:d:17678
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/9/5/1836/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/9/5/1836/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:9:y:2012:i:5:p:1836-1845:d:17678. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.