Table 5.
Screening Rates in Urban Settings Compared to Our Rural Cohort
| Service | Study authors (year) | Study type, location | Utilization rates in urban settings | Utilization rates in our study (rural setting) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cervical cancer | Agénor et al. (2016)36 | Survey, Greater Boston | 77.1% | 51% |
| Cipres et al. (2016)37 | Retrospective chart review, San Francisco, CA | 69% | ||
| Peitzmeier et al. (2014)4 | Retrospective chart review, Boston, MA | 64.3% | ||
| Porsch et al. (2016)38 | Internet-based survey, NYC | 83% | ||
| HPV vaccine | Gorbach et al. (2017)39 | Survey, Chicago, IL and Los Angeles, CA | 14% | (2006 guidelines) 46% |
| Breast cancer | Bazzi et al. (2015)40 | Retrospective chart review, Massachusetts | 50%—Transgender men 54.9%—Transgender women |
53% |
| Clavelle et al. (2015)41 | Cross-sectional, retrospective review, Northeast | 42% | ||
| Contraception | Cipres et al. (2016)37 | Retrospective chart review, San Francisco, CA | 42% report no method of birth control | 52.3% report no method of birth control |