| Title |
Use of Text-Message Reminders to Improve Participation in a Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening Program
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Systems, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10916-014-0118-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. Vidal, M. Garcia, L. Benito, N. Milà, G. Binefa, V. Moreno |
| Abstract |
To analyze the effect of a cell text message reminder service on participation in a mammogram screening program in Catalonia, Spain. A quasi-experimental design was used with women aged 50 to 69 years who had been scheduled mammogram appointments in June or July 2011. Women were personally invited by letter to attend to the breast cancer screening program (n = 12,786). Prior to the invitation, 3,719 (29.1 %) of them had provided their cell telephone number to the National Health Service. These women received a text message reminder 3 days before their scheduled appointment. Logistic regression models were used to analyze whether the text message reminder was associated with participation in screening. Cost-effectiveness of adding a text message reminder to the invitation letter was also analyzed. The overall rate of participation in breast cancer screening was 68.4 %. The participation rate was significantly higher in the text messaging group, with an age-adjusted OR of 1.56 (95 %CI: 1.43-1.70). A detailed analysis showed that the increase in participation related to the text message reminder was higher among women without previous screening who lived in areas where access to postal mail was limited (OR=2.85; 95 %CI: 2.31-3.53) compared to those who lived in areas of easier postal mail access (OR=1.66; 95 %CI: 1.36-2.02). The invitation letter+text message reminder was a cost-effective strategy. Text message reminders are an efficient cost-effective approach to improve participation in difficult-to-reach populations, such as rural areas and newly developed suburbs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 103 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 18% |
| Unknown | 21 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 30 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 October 2014.
All research outputs
#14,138,089
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#546
of 1,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,216
of 228,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#9
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,143 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 228,690 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.