TABLE 4.

Association of Timely Follow-up and Facility-level Communication Modality

Communication Type	Additional Imaging Recommended
	Facilities Endorsing in Survey (%)	Follow-up in 1–15 d When Endorsed (%) vs Not Endorsed (%)	Impact on Timely Follow-up After Adjustment* (P Value)	OR (95% CI)
To patient
Phone	89.3	83.5 vs 53.1	<.0001	4.63 (2.76–7.76)
Mail	57.1	77.3 vs 87.8	.0012	0.47 (0.30–0.75)
Patient portal	39.3	77.7 vs 85.4	.13	0.66 (0.39–1.12)
In person	10.7	65.2 vs 82.7	.17	0.56 (0.25–1.27)
To provider
Phone	3.6	70.3 vs 82.5	.0051	1.24 (1.07–1.44)
Mail	14.3	77.9 vs 83.5	.58	0.80 (0.36–1.76)
Electronic medical record	82.1	81.9 vs 89.2	.0163	0.56 (0.35–0.90)
Fax	42.9	81.3 vs 82.9	.65	0.85 (0.42–1.71)

CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; PROSPR, Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens.

^*The generalized estimating equation model controlled for age, race and ethnicity, PROSPR site, and the correlation of outcomes within a radiology facility. Results are presented for the patient and the provider among the 28 facilities for the scenario of additional imaging recommended, when not performed on the same day as the screening examination.