Objectives The purpose of this study was to examine whether adding homocysteine (Hcy) to a model based on traditional cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors improves risk classification.Background Data on using Hcy to reclassify individuals in various risk categories beyond traditional approaches have not been adequately scrutinized.Methods We performed a post hoc analysis of the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) and NHANES III (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III) datasets. Hcy was used to predict composite CVD and hard coronary heart disease (CHD) events in the MESA study and CVD and CHD mortality in the NHANES III survey using adjusted Cox-proportional hazard analysis. Reclassification of CHD events was performed using a net reclassification improvement (NRI) index with a Framingham risk score (FRS) model with and without Hcy.Results Hcy level (>15 mu mol/l) significantly predicted CVD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.79, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.19 to 1.95; p = 0.006) and CHD events (aHR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.20 to 4.09; p = 0.01) in the MESA trial and CVD (aHR: 2.72, 95% CI: 2.01 to 3.68; p < 0.001) and CHD mortality (aHR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.83 to 3.73; p < 0.001) in the NHANES III, after adjustments for traditional risk factors and C-reactive protein. The level of Hcy, when added to FRS, significantly reclassified 12.9% and 18.3% of the overall and 21.2% and 19.2% of the intermediate-risk population from the MESA and NHANES cohorts, respectively. The categoryless NRI also showed significant reclassification in both MESA (NRI: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.53; p < 0.001) and NHANES III (NRI: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.71; p < 0.001) datasets.Conclusions From these 2 disparate population cohorts, we found that addition of Hcy level to FRS significantly improved risk prediction, especially in individuals at intermediate risk for CHD events. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 58: 1025-33) (C) 2011 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

INTRODUCTION:Mammography can reduce breast cancer mortality through routine screening. We tested an intervention to increase re-screening in a county program.METHODS:The program requires enrollment before screening. We randomized women who had previously been screened by the program to a telephone call reminder for re-enrollment or usual care (postcard reminder). We followed re-enrollment and re-screening rates for both groups.RESULTS:Compared with the control group (n=610), women in the intervention group (n=599) had higher rates of initial re-enrollment at one month (10% vs. 24%, p<.001) and re-screening at two months (11% vs. 19%, p<.001). These effects persisted over time (five-month re-enrollment: 24% vs. 35%, p<.001; six-month re-screening: 23% vs. 31%, p=.004). The intervention did not alter the odds of a woman's being re-screened once re-enrolled.CONCLUSION:The increase in our re-screening rate after this simple intervention was as great or greater than the rates reported in other studies. A telephone reminder for women previously enrolled in a county breast screening program can increase re-enrollment and subsequent re-screening rates.

While screening has been demonstrated to reduce breast cancer mortality, the optimal screening interval is unknown. We designed a study to determine the risk of an advanced breast cancer diagnosis by varying the interval between mammograms.

Background. While reminders can promote cancer screening in primary care, little is known about the potential interaction between multiple reminders.Methods. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the effect of combined Pap smear plus mammogram reminders and mammogram-only reminders among 2471 women 40 years of age or older enrolled in a health maintenance organization serving a predominately Medicaid-eligible population. Reminders included both a mailed letter for the woman and a medical record prompt.Results. Intervention assignment was unassociated with differences in rates of visitation to family medicine or internal medicine or completion of mammography during the study year. Compared to women assigned to mammogram-only reminder treatment, those assigned to the combined Pap smear plus mammogram reminder intervention were more likely to visit a gynecologist (34% compared to 29%, adjusted odds ratio = 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.08-1.63) and to complete a Pap smear (30% compared to 23%, adjusted odds ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.89).Conclusions. In the study setting, the addition of Pap smear to mammography reminders has a procedure-specific effect, increasing gynecology visits and Pap smear use while neither increasing nor decreasing other primary care visits or mammography. We find no evidence of reinforcement or competition between these reminders. (C) 2003 American Health Foundation and Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Objective. To develop a longitudinal model to characterize the delivery of mammography services using repeated observations of mammography referral rates during a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of physician mammography reminders.Data Sources/Study Setting. Administrative records of a health department and observational data on mammography appointment scheduling.Study Design. The design was a longitudinal study of month-specific referral rates during a 1-year RCT. A retrospective case-control study was used to investigate differences between women with timely and delayed (or absent) mammography referral assessed at the end of the intervention year.Data Collection/Extraction Methods. Month-specific indicators for referrals and missed clinical opportunities, that is, months when clinic visitors were due for a mammogram and not referred, were constructed using administrative and observational data.Findings. In the unadjusted analysis, the effectiveness of the reminder declined over time. However, in a multivariate analysis that controlled for the number of missed opportunities, the effectiveness was constant over time. On a monthly basis, physician reminders were significantly associated with higher referral rates among clinic visitors newly due for mammography (adjusted OR = 2.8, 95 percent Cl = 1.3, 5.8) or who had one previously missed clinical opportunity (adjusted OR = 3.0, 95 percent CI = 1.6, 5.3) but were not for those with two or more missed clinical opportunities (adjusted OR 1.2, 95 percent CI = 0.7, 2.3). Factors independently associated with delayed referral were age over 65. presence of more than one chronic illness, and the absence of a physician mammography reminder.Conclusions. Longitudinal models that examine rates of referral over time and include information about outcomes on previous visits can enhance our understanding of how intervention strategies work in practice.

Mammography screening continues to be under-utilized, especially among women from lower socioeconomic groups. In order to determine whether having direct access to health care services has an effect on mammography use among low income women, we conducted a randomized trial of two alternative letter reminders among 1,717 women who were enrolled at two locations of a multi-site inner city health department in Detroit. All participants were 39 1/2 years of age and older and were due for a screening mammogram at randomization. A physician-directed reminder form was placed in each of the participant’s medical records at the beginning of the study. In addition participants were randomized to receive either a letter directing them to visit their primary care physician, a letter directing them to contact the clinic directly to schedule a mammogram, or no letter. Study participants were predominantly African–American, two-thirds of whom were over age 50, and who had minimal health insurance coverage. During the intervention year, mammograms were completed by 179 out of 967 study women at site one (18.5%), and 90 out of 750 study women at site two (12%). A multivariate model controlling for the simultaneous effect of age, insurance type, visit history and past mammography use, showed no significant independent effect of either type of letter reminder on mammography completion during the study year. In conclusion, letters targeted at women due for screening mammograms did not have a beneficial effect on mammography utilization above and beyond that of a physician medical record reminder.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which self‐reported patient involvement in decision‐making for initiation of mammography differs with age. DESIGN: Data from the 1992 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) Cancer Control Supplement were evaluated. Prevalences were weighted and variances were adjusted using SUDAAN software to account for the complex, multistage sampling probability design of the NHIS. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the relative likelihood of self‐reported involvement in the decision to have a mammogram within the preceding year as a function of age and other covariates. PARTICIPANTS: Mammography use was assessed among 3863 NHIS female respondents 40 years of age or older. The analysis of decision‐making was restricted to the subgroup of 1064 women who reported a screening mammogram within the preceding year and who provided information on the other relevant variables. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The probability of reported mammography use within the preceding year declines among older groups of interviewees. Among women with a mammogram in the preceding year, the weighted percentage of women reporting active involvement in the decision (patient decision or decided jointly with a physician) declines from 51% among women 40 to 45 years of age to 19% among those aged 75 years or older. The adjusted odds ratio comparing the likelihood of participating in the decision to have a mammogram for the oldest women, compared with the youngest, was 0.31 (95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Older women are substantially less likely than younger women to report active involvement in the mammography decision‐making process. Increased use of screening mammography among older women will require greater promotion by physicians. Other interventions, such as directed educational efforts, may also be needed to increase mammography demand among older women. J Am Geriatr Soc 48:817–821, 2000 .

The literature has not discussed in detail design and evaluation strategies for the assessment of continued effectiveness of intervention strategies. In this article we present an approach to evaluating continued effectiveness with two repeated binary outcomes that are related to the use of preventive services. We present a two-stage design with independent randomization procedures for each of two successive controlled trials and discuss the implications of the randomization plan for the statistical evaluation. Intervention effectiveness for each year is determined by an adjusted odds ratio that compares the odds of procedure use for those who received the intervention to those who did not. Changes in the two adjusted odds ratios between successive years are assessed within the context of a regressive logistic model. We demonstrate these methods by applying them to the Metropolitan Detroit Project to Reduce Avoidable Mortality from Breast Cancer. In this project, computer-generated physician mammography reminders placed prominently in medical records were used to promote mammography referrals among women visiting primary care clinics during a 2-year intervention period. An assessment of the change in intervention effectiveness as well as an adjusted estimate of the overall intervention effectiveness for the 2 years were obtained from a multivariate regressive logistic model. The advantage of this approach was its potential for reducing bias and producing a balanced comparison between intervention groups during the second year of intervention. This issue was important because previous work indicated that having had a mammogram had a significant impact on subsequent mammography use. An important component in the implementation of this design was an information management system that facilitated doing two randomization procedures efficiently. As information and computer technology advance, and as more sophisticated information systems are used for data management, designs such as these become reasonable alternatives to consider. Control Clin Trials 1999;20:280–293

Evidence demonstrating the burden of prostate cancer upon men in the United States is incontrovertible; less compelling however, is proof of benefit from early detection efforts. Nevertheless, the absence of definitive evidence does not lessen the interest of men in prostate testing or the obligation of physicians to help interested men make well-informed decisions, which integrate personal circumstance and preference with the best available data. This article provides the counseling physician with the information required to frame the current prostate testing debate and an approach to support informed decision making by men who can benefit from their assistance.

Breast cancer mortality rates remain disproportionately high among black women despite recent improvements in mammography screening utilization. We conducted a telephone survey among a sample of women (N = 202) participating in a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of a mammography reminder letter that was one component of a breast cancer control intervention strategy. The objectives of the survey were to ascertain the extent to which the letter reminder was received and acted upon, and to determine attitudes and breast cancer control practices in the target population. The study was conducted among members of a large health maintenance organization serving predominantly black women in Detroit, Michigan. Forty-eight percent of the participants completed a mammogram during the year after the letter was sent. While 72% of the women remembered receiving the letter reminder, only 5% responded to the recommendations in the letter. Important predictors of mammography completion included past mammogram utilization (OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.05-5.93), a prior physician recommendation for a mammogram (OR: 1.99; 95% CI: 1.00-3.95) and subject's knowledge of her primary physician's name (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 0.91-4.60). Letter reminders promoting primary care visits were relatively ineffective since few women reported being prompted by the letter recommendation. Strategies which target physician mammography referral behavior may have an important impact on mammography utilization among inner-city women.

BACKGROUND. Despite its effectiveness as a method of controlling cervical carcinoma, the use of Pap smear testing remains incomplete, and its promotion in the primary care setting provides an important opportunity for intervention.METHODS. The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial that involved three sites of a health maintenance organization (HMO) serving an urban minority population. Their aim was to evaluate the impact of reminders given to patients and physicians on site Visitation by patients and Pap smear use. Eligible women (n = 5801) were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 intervention combinations (in which reminders were given to either the patient or the physician, to both, or to neither). If they were ineligible for patient reminder intervention, patients were randomized only to physician reminder intervention (the presence or absence of it). The letter of reminder mailed to the patient invited women due for Pap smears to visit the HMO site, and the reminder for physicians was a medical record notice that a Pap smear was due. Logistic and survival analyses were used to investigate the correlation of intervention status with visitation, interval of time to a visit, and Pap smear use.RESULTS. In the primary intent-to-treat analysis, there was no significant effect of either patient or physician reminder interventions on rates of visitation or Pap smear completion. The secondary efficacy analyses demonstrated no overall effect of either patient or physician reminders, but effects among subgroups of women at individual HMO sites were noted. At Site 3, there was an apparent increase in lime to the next visit among the subgroup of women with a chronic illness (16 weeks with intervention vs. 9 weeks without). With the physician reminder, the odds that a Pap smear would be given during the study year were increased among women without a previous Pap smear at Site 1 (adjusted odds ratio = 1.39) and those with a chronic illness at Site 2 (adjusted odds ratio = 3.38).CONCLUSIONS. Reminders given to patients and physicians had a limited impact on visitation by patients to the HMO sites or Pap smear completion. Although some subgroups of women may benefit, the authors also observed a possibly unfavorable impact among other subgroups. These results emphasize the importance of identifying more effective interventions, targeting them to women most likely to benefit, and not overlooking the possibility that preventive intervention will have an unanticipated adverse effect. (C) 1998 American Cancer Society.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the extent to which an age-associated reduction in mammography use can be explained by declining self-reported health status.DESIGN:We analyzed data from the 1992 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and Cancer Control Supplement. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between age, health status (self-reported health and limitations in major activity), and other variables potentially related to mammography use within the past 1 year (recent mammography).PARTICIPANTS:Of 12,035 NHIS respondents we restricted our analysis to the 1,772 women aged 50 years or older who reported one or more lifetime mammograms. We excluded women without a mammogram (n = 937) because we were interested in factors related to recent use versus past use of mammography.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:The percentage of women with a recent mammogram declined with increasing age, and the age association was independent of other factors including health status (adjusted odds ratio [OR] comparing women aged 75 years or older with those aged 50 to 64 years was 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41, 0.70). This age effect persisted in an analysis restricted to women reporting good or better health (adjusted OR was 0.60, 95% CI 0.44, 0.80).CONCLUSION:The observed decline in recent mammography use with advancing age was not explained by variation in health status. Because healthy elderly women may live long enough to realize the potential benefit of screening mammography, factors responsible for its reduced use should be identified. Doing so will allow for the selective promotion of screening mammography among those older women most likely to benefit.

OBJECTIVES. The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the sustained effectiveness of a computerized reminder system in promoting mammography during a second year of continuing intervention at three primary care practices of a Health Department and a health maintenance organization in Detroit, Michigan.METHODS. Out-of-pocket mammography cost was eliminated for all participants (limited intervention). Computer-generated reminders promoting physician referral for mammography were placed in the medical records of women due for mammography 1 month in advance of their due date (full intervention).RESULTS. Among 1,225 year 2 visitors, mammography rates were 44% for full intervention versus 28% for limited intervention at the health department (adjusted odds ratio [OR] for effect of full intervention 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.40-2.40) and 45% for full versus 46% for limited at the health maintenance organization (adjusted OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.80-1.42). These second year results contrasted with those observed for year 1, during which a significant effect of full intervention was demonstrated for both organizations. After controlling for patient characteristics and site, the effect sizes of full intervention were reduced significantly in the second year compared with the first year (P = 0.05).CONCLUSIONS. The effect of computerized mammography reminders can be sustained in a second year of continued intervention, but individual practice sites and organizations vary in their responsiveness to the intervention. Strategies to promote periodic and repetitive procedure use must identify and address time-varying barriers to their effectiveness.