Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Helen I. Meissner is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Helen I. Meissner.


Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | 2006

Patterns of Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake among Men and Women in the United States

Helen I. Meissner; Nancy Breen; Carrie N. Klabunde; Sally W. Vernon

Objective: The purpose of this report is to examine (a) gender-specific correlates of colorectal cancer test use using recent national data from 2003 and (b) patterns of colorectal cancer screening by gender and test modality over time. Methods: We analyze data from the 1987, 1992, 1998, 2000, and 2003 National Health Interview Surveys. Our sample consists of men and women ≥50 years never diagnosed with colorectal cancer and who reported a recent fecal occult blood test and/or endoscopy. Results: In 2003, both men and women reported higher rates of colonoscopy (32.2% and 29.8%, respectively) than use of FOBT (16.1% and 15.3%, respectively) or sigmoidoscopy (7.6% and 5.9%, respectively). Men reported higher use of endoscopy than women if they had a usual source of health care, had talked to a general doctor, and had two to five visits to the doctor in the past year. Men and women 65 years and older had higher rates of any recommended colorectal cancer test (55.8% and 48.5%, respectively) than persons 50 to 64 years (males, 41.0%; females, 31.4%). Use of colorectal cancer tests also was higher among both genders if they were not Hispanic, had higher educational attainment, were former smokers, had health insurance or a usual source of care, or if they talked to a general doctor. Recent use of colorectal cancer tests has increased since 2000 for both women and men largely due to increased use of colonoscopy. Conclusions: Colorectal cancer testing is increasing for both men and women, although the prevalence of testing remains higher in men. Our data support previous findings documenting socioeconomic disparities in colorectal cancer test use. Access barriers to screening could be particularly difficult to overcome if colonoscopy becomes the preferred colorectal cancer screening modality. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(2):389–94)


Journal of Health Communication | 2006

Cancer knowledge and disparities in the information age

Kasisomayajula Viswanath; Nancy Breen; Helen I. Meissner; Richard P. Moser; Bradford W. Hesse; Whitney R. Steele; William Rakowski

Increasing information flow often leads to widening gaps in knowledge between different socioeconomic status (SES) groups as higher SES groups are more likely to acquire this new information at a faster rate than lower SES groups. These gaps in knowledge may offer a partial but robust explanation for differential risk behaviors and health disparities between different social groups. Drawing on the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2003), a national survey of communication behaviors conducted by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), we examine the relationship between publicity and knowledge gaps on two cancer topics that received different levels of publicity: knowledge about tobacco and sun exposure and their respective links to cancer. Analyses of the HINTS 2003 data suggest that differential knowledge levels of causes of cancer between SES groups are one potential explanation of cancer disparities that have been extensively reported in the literature. It is evident that high income and high education are associated with awareness about causes of major cancers such as lung and skin, and may allow people to protect themselves and minimize their risks. The data also show that heavier media attention could attenuate the knowledge gaps though moderate publicity or lack of news coverage may actually widen them. Last, the findings in this article suggest that it is necessary to take into account the SES variation within different racial and ethnic groups rather than mask them by treating the groups as one.


Cancer | 2007

Reported drop in mammography : is this cause for concern?

Nancy Breen; Kathleen A. Cronin; Helen I. Meissner; Stephen H. Taplin; Florence K. Tangka; Jasmin A. Tiro; Timothy S. McNeel

Timely screening with mammography can prevent a substantial number of deaths from breast cancer. The objective of this brief was to ascertain whether recent use of mammography has dropped nationally.


Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | 2007

What do women in the U.S. know about human papillomavirus and cervical cancer

Jasmin A. Tiro; Helen I. Meissner; Sarah Kobrin; Veronica Chollette

Background: Women need to understand the link between human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer in order to make appropriate, evidence-based choices among existing prevention strategies (Pap test, HPV DNA test, and HPV vaccine). Assessment of the publics knowledge in nationally representative samples is a high priority for cervical cancer control. Objectives: To assess factors associated with U.S. womens awareness of HPV and knowledge about its link to cervical cancer. Methods: Analyzed cross-sectional data from women ages 18 to 75 years old responding to the 2005 Health Information National Trends Survey (n = 3,076). Results: Among the 40% of women who had ever heard about HPV, <50% knew it caused cervical cancer; knowledge that HPV was sexually transmitted and caused abnormal Pap tests was higher (64% and 79%, respectively). Factors associated with having heard about HPV included: younger age, being non–Hispanic White, higher educational attainment, exposure to multiple health information sources, trusting health information, regular Pap tests, awareness of changes in cervical cancer screening guidelines, and having tested positive for HPV. Accurate knowledge of the HPV-cervical cancer link was associated with abnormal Pap and positive HPV test results. Conclusions: Awareness about HPV among U.S. women is low. Having heard about HPV did not ensure accurate knowledge. Strategies for communicating accurate information about HPV transmission, prevention, and detection as well as risk and treatment of cervical cancer are needed. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(2):288–94)


Cancer Causes & Control | 2007

Which women aren't getting mammograms and why? (United States).

Helen I. Meissner; Nancy Breen; Michele L. Taubman; Sally W. Vernon; Barry I. Graubard

ObjectiveThis study investigates why women who reported no recent mammogram did not get the test.MethodsUsing data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), we examine correlates of mammography use among women 40 years and older (n = 10,212), with particular focus on the 30% (n = 3,188) who reported no recent mammogram. Non-screening is examined in the context of two important correlates of mammography use—access to health care and a physician’s recommendation to get a mammogram.ResultsIn total, 80% of non-screeners who reported having access to healthcare did not receive a recommendation for a mammogram. Women age 65 years and older were more likely than younger women to report not receiving a recommendation (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.25–2.50). For women who reported having access, non-screening was significantly more likely among younger women (40–49), those with less education, incomes less than


Preventive Medicine | 2003

Smoking cessation interventions in U.S. racial/ethnic minority populations: an assessment of the literature.

Deirdre Lawrence; Jessica E Graber; Sherry Mills; Helen I. Meissner; Richard B. Warnecke

20,000, residence outside Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and no family history of breast cancer. Among women with access problems, those who had not visited a primary care provider in the past year were much more likely to be non-screeners (80%) compared with those who had seen a provider (46%). Among women with access, those who reported put it off as the main reason for non-screening were significantly more likely to be younger and to be born in the U.S. than women who said that they didn’t know they needed a mammogram.ConclusionsMost non-screeners report not receiving a physician recommendation for mammography. Although a minority reported access problems, the effect of lacking access on utilization was strong and is accentuated when women without access do not see a doctor. These findings confirm the importance of a mammography recommendation and raise questions concerning whether this information is being conveyed by physicians or heard by patients.


CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians | 2004

Clinical Breast Examination: Practical Recommendations for Optimizing Performance and Reporting

Judy Hannan; Janet Osuch; Marianne H. Alciati; Cornelia J. Baines; Mary B. Barton; Janet Kay Bobo; Cathy Coleman; Mary Dolan; Ginny Gaumer; Daniel B. Kopans; Susan E. Kutner; Dorothy S. Lane; Herschel W. Lawson; Helen I. Meissner; Candace Moorman; H. S. Pennypacker; Peggy Pierce; Eva Sciandra; Robert A. Smith; Ralph J. Coates

BACKGROUND Smoking prevalence rates in some ethnic minority groups are elevated relative to the majority population. Thus, identifying cessation interventions that are effective for these groups is important. This article reviews published studies that examine effects of smoking cessation interventions relevant to racial ethnic minority populations. METHODS A literature search of tobacco interventions, reporting smoking cessation outcomes (including quit rates) in U.S. minority populations, was conducted for the period 1985 to 2001. RESULTS Thirty-six studies met preset criteria for inclusion. Twenty-three reported quit rates for African Americans, 4 for Asian/Pacific Islanders, 3 for Native Americans, and 10 for Hispanics. CONCLUSIONS The disproportionate number of studies that focused on African American smokers compared with the other major racial/ethnic groups suggests the need for continued efforts to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for all ethnic minority populations. Abstinence rates varied considerably depending on study design and intervention strategy. Moreover, a relatively small percentage of studies that were randomized trials reported statistically significant findings, and most used intervention strategies that do not reflect the current state-of-the-art. These results strongly suggest that more research is needed to identify successful smoking cessation interventions in these populations.


Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | 2006

Correlates of Repeat and Recent Mammography for Women Ages 45 to 75 in the 2002 to 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2003)

William Rakowski; Helen I. Meissner; Sally W. Vernon; Nancy Breen; Barbara K. Rimer; Melissa A. Clark

Clinical breast examination (CBE) seeks to detect breast abnormalities or evaluate patient reports of symptoms to find palpable breast cancers at an earlier stage of progression. Treatment options for earlier‐stage cancers are generally more numerous, include less toxic alternatives, and are usually more effective than treatments for later‐stage cancers. For average‐risk women aged 40 and younger, earlier detection of palpable tumors identified by CBE can lead to earlier therapy. After age 40, when mammography is recommended, CBE is regarded as an adjunct to mammography. Recent debate, however, has questioned the contributions of CBE to the detection of breast cancer in asymptomatic women and particularly to improved survival and reduced mortality rates. Clinicians remain widely divided about the level of evidence supporting CBE and their confidence in the examination. Yet, CBE is practiced extensively in the United States and continues to be recommended by many leading health organizations. It is in this context that this report provides a brief review of evidence for CBEs role in the earlier detection of breast cancer, highlights current practice issues, and presents recommendations that, when implemented, could contribute to greater standardization of the practice and reporting of CBE. These recommendations may also lead to improved evidence of the nature and extent of CBEs contribution to the earlier detection of breast cancer.


Cancer | 2004

Promoting cancer screening: Learning from experience†

Helen I. Meissner; Robert A. Smith; Barbara K. Rimer; Katherine M. Wilson; William Rakowski; Sally W. Vernon; Peter A. Briss

Background: Most national-level mammography data are for ever-had and most-recent screening. There are few national-level data on rates of repeat, on-schedule mammography, and on the prevalence and correlates of repeat mammography. It is also important to investigate the similarity of correlates for repeat and recent mammography. Methods: Analyses were from data for women ages 45 to 75 in the 2002 to 2003 Health Information and National Trends Survey (HINTS 2003; N = 1,581). The two dependent variables were self-report of repeat mammography (two exams on schedule, based on an every-other-year interval) and recent mammography only (one mammogram within the past 2 years). Results: The prevalence of recent mammography was 81.6% (95% confidence interval, 79.1-84.1) and for repeat mammography was 72.2% (95% confidence interval, 69.0-75.4). An access to care variable combining insurance coverage and regular source of care was the strongest sociodemographic correlate of both mammography indicators. Most other sociodemographic variables were not associated with mammography status. Five psychosocial/behavioral variables were associated with both mammography indicators (smoking status, attention to health information, knowledge of screening interval, worry about breast cancer, and recent mood status). Correlates were very similar for repeat and recent mammography. Conclusions: Although access to care had the strongest association with mammography, psychosocial and behavioral variables did better as a group than the sociodemographic variables. A standard set of such variables should be considered for all national surveys. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(11):2093–101)


Quality of Life Research | 2012

Best practices in mixed methods for quality of life research.

Ann C. Klassen; John W. Creswell; Vicki L. Plano Clark; Katherine Clegg Smith; Helen I. Meissner

This article provides an overview of behavioral and social science cancer screening intervention research and introduces the scope of topics addressed in this supplement to Cancer. The authors identify and address issues to consider before conducting interventions to promote the uptake of screening tests, such as the benefits and harms associated with screening. Trends in the use of cancer screening tests are discussed in the context of their efficacy and adoption over time. Both the development and breadth of social and behavioral intervention research intended to increase the use of effective tests are reviewed as background for the articles that follow. The application of the lessons from this extensive knowledge base not only should accelerate the uptake of the effective cancer screening tests currently available, but also can guide future directions for research. Cancer 2004. Published 2004 by the American Cancer Society.

Collaboration


Dive into the Helen I. Meissner's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Nancy Breen

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Sally W. Vernon

University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Barbara K. Rimer

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jasmin A. Tiro

University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Carrie N. Klabunde

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

K. Robin Yabroff

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Cathy A. Coyne

West Virginia University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Julie M. Legler

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mona Saraiya

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge