Skip to main content
. 2014 Dec;21(6):294–304. doi: 10.3747/co.21.2056

TABLE V.

Associations between physician visits and cervical cancer in the Invasive Cervical Cancer Study, Montreal, Quebec, 1998–2004

Practitioner type Study group or 95% ci Adjustedb


Casesa [n (%)] Controls [n (%)] or 95% ci
Family physician
  0 Visits 54 (9.6) 146 (26.0) Reference Reference
  1 to 2 Visits 65 (11.6) 53 (9.4) 4.8 2.7 to 8.4 3.6 2.0 to 6.6
  3 to 4 Visits 55 (9.8) 49 (8.7) 4.4 2.4 to 7.9 3.4 1.8 to 6.6
  >4 Visits 388 (69.0) 314 (55.9) 5.2 3.3 to 8.2 4.3 2.4 to 7.6
Gynecologist
  0 Visits 355 (63.2) 345 (61.4) Reference Reference
  1 to 2 Visits 110 (19.6) 75 (13.4) 1.4 1.0 to 1.9 0.9 0.6 to 1.3
  3 to 4 Visits 38 (6.8) 58 (10.3) 0.6 0.4 to 0.9 0.4 0.2 to 0.7
  >4 Visits 59 (10.5) 84 (15.0) 0.7 0.5 to 1.0 0.5 0.3 to 0.7
Medical specialist other than gynecologist
  0 Visits 86 (15.3) 172 (30.6) Reference Reference
  1 to 2 Visits 110 (19.6) 67 (11.9) 4.1 2.6 to 6.4 2.4 1.4 to 4.0
  3 to 4 Visits 65 (11.6) 47 (8.4) 3.6 2.2 to 5.9 2.0 1.1 to 3.5
  >4 Visits 301 (53.6) 276 (49.1) 2.8 1.9 to 4.0 1.7 1.0 to 2.8
a

Of 568 patients who met the study inclusion criteria, 6 did not have a ramq number. Matched controls were not obtained for the latter 6 patients, thus leaving 562 cases and 562 controls for analysis.

b

Each model was adjusted for the number of visits to other physician types, using the 0, 1–2, 3–4, >4 categories.

or = odds ratio; ci = confidence interval.