Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Prev Med. 2016 Apr 28;51(4):507–512. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.03.017

Table 3.

Logistic Regression of Timely Follow-up of Abnormal Screening Tests by Screening Type and Race/Ethnicity

Race/Ethnicity OR (95% CI)
Breast a Breast b Breast c Colorectal a Colorectal c
N total N=17,739 N=6,564 N=6,447 n=22,805 n=22,598
N.H. white 1.00 (ref) 1.00 (ref) 1.00 (ref) 1.00 (ref) 1.00 (ref)
N.H. black 0.53 (0.41–0.69) 0.55 (0.42–0.72) 0.71 (0.51–0.97) 0.90 (0.82,0.99) 1.00 (0.90,1.10)
Hispanic 0.90 (0.66–1.22) 0.90 (0.64–1.27) 1.26 (0.87–1.84) 1.05 (0.98,1.14) 1.12 (1.04,1.21)
Asian/PI 0.71 (0.44–1.15) 0.66 (0.38–1.14) 0.67 (0.38–1.15) 1.00 (0.92,1.09) 0.98 (0.90,1.07)
a

Logistic regression model adjusted for study site, age, year of test. (All sites)

b

Logistic regression model adjusted for study site, age, year of test. (VT excluded).

c

Logistic regression model adjusted for study site, age, year of test, income (ZIP code median), and insurance (VT excluded from mammography analysis)

N.H., Non-Hispanic; PI, Pacific Islander