HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE COVER ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) CME: Take the course for this article: Information Technology and Cancer Prevention Submit a letter to the editor Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jimbo, M. Articles by Rana, G. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jimbo, M. Articles by Rana, G. K.

Information Technology and Cancer Prevention

Dr. Jimbo is Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Dr. Nease is Associate Professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Dr. Ruffin is Professor and Assistant Chair for Research, Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Ms. Rana is Clinical Librarian, Taubman Medical Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Information technology is rapidly advancing and making its way into many primary care settings. The technology may provide the means to increase the delivery of cancer preventive services. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the literature on information technology impacts on the delivery of cancer preventive services in primary care offices. Thirty studies met our selection criteria. Technology interventions studied to date have been limited to some type of reminder to either patients or providers. Patient reminders have been mailed before appointments, mailed unrelated to an appointment, mailed after a missed appointment, or given at the time of an appointment. Telephone call interventions have not used technology to automate the calls. Provider interventions have been primarily computer-generated reminders at the time of an appointment. However, there has been limited use of computer-generated audits, feedback, or report cards. The effectiveness of information technology on increasing cancer screening was modest at best. The full potential of information technology to unload the provider-patient face-to-face encounter has not been examined. There is critical need to study these new technologic approaches to understand the impact and acceptance by providers and patients.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. R. Simon, F. Zhang, S. B. Soumerai, A. Ensroth, L. Bernstein, R. H. Fletcher, and D. Ross-Degnan Failure of Automated Telephone Outreach With Speech Recognition to Improve Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial Arch Intern Med, February 8, 2010; 170(3): 264 - 270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Sifri, R. Wender, D. Lieberman, M. Potter, K. Peterson, T. K. Weber, and R. Smith Developing a Quality Screening Colonoscopy Referral System in Primary Care Practice: A Report from the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable CA Cancer J Clin, December 18, 2009; (2009) caac.20048v1. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. G. Zapka Validation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Behaviors Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2008; 17(4): 745 - 747. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Sarfaty and R. Wender How to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates in Practice CA Cancer J Clin, November 1, 2007; 57(6): 354 - 366. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. J. Coups, S. L. Manne, N. J. Meropol, and D. S. Weinberg Multiple Behavioral Risk Factors for Colorectal Cancer and Colorectal Cancer Screening Status Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., March 1, 2007; 16(3): 510 - 516. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]