Background
Methods
General framework for the grey literature review
Dissertation/thesis literature search
Types of dissertation/thesis studies
Search methods for dissertation/thesis studies
Identifying dissertation/thesis studies
Dissertations and theses search results
Results
Dissertations and Theses
Description of dissertation study
Author source | Presentation title & focus | Data collection | Event participants | Special event description | Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conferences – Single Component (Special event only)
| |||||
K. White [19] | Does conducting routine community health outreach events reach new women? An evaluation of a breast & cervical cancer screening program for Latina immigrants | Pre-event and Post-event | Target audience: Latina immigrants | Event Type: Educational Luncheon | Baseline Screening: |
Conference: | Cancer focus: Breast and Cervical | Sample: N = 932 Latina immigrants; age: 70.7% 18-39, 19.4% 40-49, and 9.9% 50-88; 6.9% Insured | Description: Educational luncheons focused on breast and cervical cancer, were hosted at local churches on Saturday mornings to increase screening among target population. | No data available | |
APHA Conference, 2010 | Event Components: | Post Event Screening: | |||
• Educational presentations from Spanish-speaking physicians and/or breast cancer survivors | Pap Tests: 412 (52%) | ||||
• Referrals and ability to schedule pap tests and mammograms | Out of n = 792, women who completed information records | ||||
• Magnets were provided with appointment and provider information for the low-cost pap and free mammogram screenings | Mammogram: 141 (60.8%) | ||||
Community Guide Strategies: GE, CRR, SM, ROPC, RSB | Out of n = 232, women who completed information records and were over 40 years of age | ||||
Other Outcomes: No data available | |||||
Cost: No data available | |||||
C. Rice [20] | Implementation of an Evidence-based Cancer Prevention and Control Program through Texas AgriLife Extension: Friend to Friend | Pre-event and Post-event | Target audience: Uninsured and underserved women in rural Texas | Event Type: Health Party | Baseline Screening: |
Conference: | Cancer focus: Breast and Cervical | Sample: N = 1,095 participants; 41% under age 50, 32% 50-64, and 27% 65 and older; 93% white, 7% African American | Description: 45 health parties were planned throughout 40 counties. The parties were designed for adult women to hear a health professional speak and to identify clinics that provide uninsured women screening. | Mammogram Status: | |
CPRIT, 2011 | Event Components: | Within last 12 months: 49.4% | |||
• Group educational sessions were provided by health care providers or cancer survivors; followed by small group discussions | Within last 24 months: 10.1% | ||||
• Educational materials were provided in English and Spanish | Within the last 3-years: 5.4% | ||||
• Incentives were provided | Longer than 3 years: 10.0% | ||||
• One party provided mammogram screening on-site | Never had a mammogram: 25.2% | ||||
• Providers came to the events to sign participants up for screening referrals and scheduling of appointments | Pap Test Status: | ||||
• Community Guide Strategies: GE, SM, RSB, ROPC | Within last 12 months: 54.3% | ||||
Within last 24 months: 15.6% | |||||
Within last 3 years: 5.1% | |||||
Longer than 3-years: 20.9% | |||||
Never had a Pap: 4% | |||||
Post Event Screening: No data available | |||||
Other outcomes: Knowledge | |||||
Cost: No data available | |||||
D. Dahlke [22] | Increasing Screening Rates for Latinas Using Health Fiestas and Promotoras | Pre-event and Post-event | Target audience: Underserved Latinas | Event Type: Cultural Event/Health Fiesta | Baseline Screening: |
Conference: | Cancer focus: Breast and Cervical | Sample: N = 8,026 (for the Georgia Events); 86% uninsured | Description: The health fiestas were designed to reduce health disparities within the Latino Community through the events and a patient navigation program which were designed to provide access to early detection and screening opportunities. | Mammogram status: | |
CPRIT, 2011 | Event Components: | In the last 12 months: 4,816 (60%) | |||
• Educational materials were provided in Spanish | Pap Test status: | ||||
• Food, music, dancing, and fun activities were provided | Last 12 month: 6,423 (80%) | ||||
• Local health care providers offered free or low-cost screenings | Post Event Screening: | ||||
• Community Guide Strategies: 1 on 1, GE, SM, RSB, ROPC | Mammogram: 218 (6.8%) of screening eligible | ||||
Clinical Breast Exams: 3158 (39.3%) | |||||
Other outcomes: Barriers to care | |||||
Cost: No data available | |||||
Dissertation – Single Component
| |||||
A. Sun [17] | Promoting Breast Cancer Screening Among Chinese American Women Through Young Children’s Theatrical Performance, 2009 | Pre-event and Post-event | Target audience: Chinese American females, able to read either Chinese or English, 18 or older, and audience members | Event Type: Play | Baseline Screening: |
Dissertation Source: Proquest | Cancer focus: Breast | Sample: 173 participants; Average age: 40.1; 100% Asian and female; 85% covered by insurance | Description: a theatrical pre-school performance in educating Chinese American women about breast cancer detection. | Had a mammogram in past year (women > 40 years old): | |
Event Components: | 34 (55.7%) | ||||
• Pre-school theatrical performances were used as an screening educational tool | Change in Knowledge Score Pretest to Posttest: | ||||
• Foam boards in the play displayed Susan G. Komen guidelines | 10.2% decreased | ||||
Community Guide Strategies: SM, GE | 41.8% had no change | ||||
48.0% increased | |||||
Post Event Screening: | |||||
No data available | |||||
Other outcomes: Attentiveness, Acculturation | |||||
Cost: No data available | |||||
Conferences – Multiple Components (Special event combined with other community events)
| |||||
L. Vera-Cala [21] | Effectiveness of Cuidandome (Taking Care of Me) | Pre-event and Post-event | Target audience: Latina-immigrant women in Dane County, WI | Event Type: Health Parties | Baseline Screening: |
Conference: | Cancer focus: Breast and Cervical | Sample: N = 1,381; Spanish speaking women | Description: 167 home health parties led by lay health advisors were performed to increase breast and cervical cancer screening among Latino-immigrant women. | Mammogram (n = 222): | |
APHA Conference, 2011 | Event Components: | 73 (33%) | |||
• One hour educational session on breast and cervical cancer | Pap Test (n = 222): | ||||
• Same language lay health providers used to promote cervical and breast cancer screening | 135 (61%) | ||||
• Provided resources to party participants on how to apply for free or reduced cost screening | Post Event Screening: | ||||
Community Guide Strategies: GE, SM, MM, RSB, ROPC | Mammogram: | ||||
1-month post: 91 (41%) | |||||
3-months post: 127 (57%) | |||||
15-months post: 118 (53%) | |||||
Pap Test: | |||||
1-month post: 151 (68%) | |||||
3-months post: 155 (70%) | |||||
15-months post: 140 (63%) | |||||
Other outcomes: Intention, Knowledge | |||||
Cost: Approximately $130.00 per event | |||||
B. Hunt [18] | Reaching at-Risk Women to Promote Breast Cancer Screening on the Westside of Chicago | Pre-event and Post-event | Target audience: Women over 40, African American and Hispanic, uninsured or under insured women | Event Type: Forums and Health Fairs | Baseline Screening: |
Conference: | Cancer focus: Breast and Cervical | Sample: N = 880; 87% over 40; 58% African American; 36% Mexican or Puerto Rican; 40% no insurance | Description: The forums and health fairs were designed to reduce disparities and improve overall breast health outcomes by educating, engaging, and empowering women to increase routine mammogram utilization and to share their knowledge. | Mammography (women > 40): | |
APHA Conference, 2011 | Event Components: | Within 2 years: 443 (61%) | |||
• Community health workers provided 45-minute educational presentations and helped participants set-up appointments | 2 or more years ago: 187 (26%) | ||||
• Client reminders are sent to participants when due for their next screening | Never: 95 (13%) | ||||
• Gifts, raffles, and specialized cookies were provided as incentives | Post Event Screening: | ||||
• Transportation was provided | Mammography: n = 357 (40.1%) | ||||
• Women requesting screening appointments are assigned patient navigator. | Cost: $3,000-$4,000 per forum | ||||
Community Guide Strategies: GE, CRR, SM, RSB |
Conference literature search
Types of studies presented at conferences
Three-stage search and data gathering methodology for conference grey literature
Stage I: abstract search
Level | Name of organization | Years reviewed | # Abstracts reviewed | # Abstracts chosen for discussion | # Included studies |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
World | World Conference on Breast Cancer Foundation | 2011 | 122 | 1 | 0 |
National | Academy Health | 2009-2011 | 445 | 0 | N/A |
National | Avon | 2010 | 16 | 0 | N/A |
National | American Public Health Association (APHA) | 2009-2011 | 4,330 | 15 | 3 |
National | National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) | 2009-2011 | 131 | 0 | N/A |
National | National Institutes of Health (NIH) Colorectal Cancer Screening Conference | 2010 | 22 | 0 | N/A |
National | Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE) | 5/2009, 11/2009 4/2010, 11/2010 5/2011, 10/2011 | 605 | 0 | N/A |
National | Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM) | 2009-2011 | 2096 | 0 | N/A |
Regional | Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) | 2010 & 2011 | 369 | 4 | 2 |
Total
|
23 conferences
|
8,136
|
20
|
5
|
Stage II: solicitation of additional information from presenters
Stage III: interviews with presenters for further information
Data obtained from the three-stage process
Type of conference data | Stage I: abstracts | Stage II: additional materials | Stage III: Interviews |
---|---|---|---|
Author, Title, Conference, Date of Conference | 5 | 5 | 0 |
Study Design
| |||
Part of Additional Activities (Larger intervention or Research Project) | 1 | 2 | 5 |
Intervention
| |||
Goals and Objectives of Event or Research | 4 | 5 | 4 |
Theory/Guiding Concept | 5 | 4 | 2 |
Type of Event and Cancer | 5 | 5 | 5 |
Type of Cancer Screening Services Provided (Exams, Referrals, Patient Navigators) | 3 | 4 | 4 |
Community Guide Strategies Used | 3 | 2 | 5 |
Other Health Services Provided | 0 | 2 | 1 |
Other Health Topics Discussed | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Educational Materials (sources, type) | 0 | 2 | 5 |
Delivery
| |||
Logistics (Date, Duration, Frequency) | 4 | 5 | 1 |
Setting (Place, setting, area) | 4 | 4 | 3 |
Who Provided Services | 4 | 4 | 4 |
Agencies Involved (Host, Funders, Partners) | 1 | 5 | 5 |
Implementation Steps | 1 | 2 | 5 |
Target Population | 5 | 5 | 0 |
Demographics of Participants | 3 | 5 | 0 |
Recruitment | 1 | 3 | 5 |
Outcomes
| |||
Process Outcomes (If it was collected, results) | 5 | 5 | 4 |
Screening Outcomes (If it was collected, results) | 2 | 3 | 2 |
Follow-up (If it was collected, results) | 1 | 3 | 5 |
Other Outcomes (If it was collected, results) | 5 | 5 | 1 |
Costs and Resources
| |||
Total Costs | 0 | 0 | 3 |
Further Cost Information (Break-down of costs, cost analysis, resources) | 0 | 1 | 5 |
Discussion
| |||
Generalizability/Applicability | 4 | 4 | 0 |
Barriers/Study Limitations | 0 | 3 | 5 |
Recommendations | 3 | 2 | 0 |