Optimism may moderate screening mammogram frequency in Medicare: A longitudinal study
[ABSTRACT READ IN FULL AT SOURCE, an institutional repository record which prints it entire; THE FULL TEXT WAS NOT READ, and an erratum exists which was ALSO NOT READ, so its existence is recorded and not its content] Progovac, A. M., Pettinger, M., Donohue, J. M., Chang, C.-C. H., Matthews, K. A., Habermann, E. B., Kuller, L. H., Rosal, M., Li, W., Garcia, L., & Tindle, H. A. (2019). 'Optimism may moderate screening mammogram frequency in Medicare: A longitudinal study.' Medicine 98(24), e15869. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000015869. THE SHARPEST COUNTER-RESULT IN THE FILE, IN THE SAME COHORT AND ON THE SAME INSTRUMENT AS THE HEADLINE LONGEVITY PAPER. Women's Health Initiative observational cohort survey data linked to Medicare claims; n = 48,291 women with no history of breast cancer, enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B for at least two years from 2005 to 2010; optimism at baseline on the revised Life Orientation Test; repeated-events survival models. Result, verbatim: 'Contrary to our hypotheses, repeated events survival models showed that women with the lowest optimism scores (i.e., more pessimistic tendencies) received 5% more frequent screenings after complete covariate adjustment (p<.01) compared to the most optimistic group, and showed no association between cynical hostility and frequency of screening mammograms. Sociodemographic factors did not appear to mediate the relationship between optimism and screenings. However, higher levels of education and higher levels of income were associated with more frequent screenings (both p<.01).' Their own qualification, which must be held in any prose: 'results for optimism were primarily driven by women who were aged 75 or older after January 2009, when changes to clinical guidelines lead to uncertainty about risks and benefits of screening in this age group.' Why it matters: attendance at a physical examination for screening purposes is one of the behavioural covariates in Lee and colleagues' main model, so a variable doing the attenuation in the headline paper points the wrong way in the cohort next door. The older literature pointing the same way, McCaul and colleagues 1996 and an unnamed Michigan study, was NOT READ, carries no figures, and may be mentioned only as a smaller older literature pointing the same way.
[ABSTRACT READ IN FULL AT SOURCE, an institutional repository record which prints it entire; THE FULL TEXT WAS NOT READ, and an erratum exists which was ALSO NOT READ, so its existence is recorded and not its content] Progovac, A. M., Pettinger, M., Donohue, J. M., Chang, C.-C. H., Matthews, K. A., Habermann, E. B., Kuller, L. H., Rosal, M., Li, W., Garcia, L., & Tindle, H. A. (2019). 'Optimism may moderate screening mammogram frequency in Medicare: A longitudinal study.' Medicine 98(24), e15869. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000015869. THE SHARPEST COUNTER-RESULT IN THE FILE, IN THE SAME COHORT AND ON THE SAME INSTRUMENT AS THE HEADLINE LONGEVITY PAPER. Women's Health Initiative observational cohort survey data linked to Medicare claims; n = 48,291 women with no history of breast cancer, enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B for at least two years from 2005 to 2010; optimism at baseline on the revised Life Orientation Test; repeated-events survival models. Result, verbatim: 'Contrary to our hypotheses, repeated events survival models showed that women with the lowest optimism scores (i.e., more pessimistic tendencies) received 5% more frequent screenings after complete covariate adjustment (p<.01) compared to the most optimistic group, and showed no association between cynical hostility and frequency of screening mammograms. Sociodemographic factors did not appear to mediate the relationship between optimism and screenings. However, higher levels of education and higher levels of income were associated with more frequent screenings (both p<.01).' Their own qualification, which must be held in any prose: 'results for optimism were primarily driven by women who were aged 75 or older after January 2009, when changes to clinical guidelines lead to uncertainty about risks and benefits of screening in this age group.' Why it matters: attendance at a physical examination for screening purposes is one of the behavioural covariates in Lee and colleagues' main model, so a variable doing the attenuation in the headline paper points the wrong way in the cohort next door. The older literature pointing the same way, McCaul and colleagues 1996 and an unnamed Michigan study, was NOT READ, carries no figures, and may be mentioned only as a smaller older literature pointing the same way.
Written from the aBSTRACT READ IN FULL AT SOURCE, an institutional repository record which prints it entire; THE FULL TEXT WAS NOT READ, and an erratum exists which was ALSO NOT READ, so its existence is recorded and not its content.
What our sources record
Recorded when this source was checked, figures included, with page references and quotation marks removed.
Progovac, A. M., Pettinger, M., Donohue, J. M., Chang, C.-C. H., Matthews, K. A., Habermann, E. B., Kuller, L. H., Rosal, M., Li, W., Garcia, L., & Tindle, H. A. (2019). Optimism may moderate screening mammogram frequency in Medicare: A longitudinal study. Medicine, 98(24), e15869. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000015869