Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Diabetes and Cancer Screening Rates among Appalachian and Non-Appalachian Residents of Kentucky

Steven T. Fleming, Margaret M. Love and Keisa Bennett
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine November 2011, 24 (6) 682-692; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2011.06.110094
Steven T. Fleming
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Margaret M. Love
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Keisa Bennett
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Descriptive Statistics of a Sample of 1030 Kentucky Residents, 2008

    StrataTotal (n = 1,030)Men (n = 332)Women (n = 698)
    FreqPercentFreqPercentFreqPercent
    Age (years)
        0–24323.1164.8162.3
        25–4932131.28626.023533.7
        50–6439338.213641.125736.9
        65–7415715.35817.59914.2
        75–851009.7267.97410.6
        ≥85252.492.7162.3
    Appalachian region19.3
        Yes21420.86480.715021.6
        No81379.226854578.4
    Married or living with partner
        Yes64363.123270.141159.7
        No37636.99929.927740.3
    Race
        White95493.730893.364693.9
        Black464.5164.9304.4
        Asian40.410.330.4
        Other141.451.591.3
    Education98
        <High school13213.03410.324114.2
        High school or GED34734.110632.134935.0
        College53952.919057.650.7
    Diabetes status
        None81379.125677.155780.0
        Prediabetes525.1144.2385.5
        Diabetes16315.96218.710114.5
    • Denominator for percents includes all data available for any given analysis (eg, n = 1,027 having Appalachian/non-Appalachian county data; n = 1,028 for diabetes status).

    • Freq, frequency; GED, General Educational Development.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Bivariate Associations between Diabetes Status* and Screening Examinations, Kentucky Residents, 2008

    Frequency†Percent ScreenedP (χ2)
    Women, age ≥23 years
        Papanicolaou test within 2 years
            With diabetes5766.7.06
            Without diabetes37478.1
        Papanicolaou test within 3 years
            With diabetes5770.2.0007
            Without diabetes37484.3
    Women, age ≥42 years
        Regular mammography
            With diabetes8968.5.006
            Without diabetes40181.6
        Mammography within 2 years
            With diabetes9466.0
            Without diabetes42376.8.03
    Men and women, age ≥52 years
        FOBT within 2 years
            With diabetes12924.8.25
            Without diabetes46720.1
        Colonoscopy/ sigmoidoscopy within 10 years
            With Diabetes13063.1.72
            Without Diabetes46661.4
    • Bold values indicate P≤ .05.

    • ↵* Patients with diabetes are subjects who have ever been told that they had diabetes by a health professional. Patients without diabetes are subjects who have not ever been told by a health professional that they had diabetes.

    • ↵† Frequency differs across strata because of age and sex eligibility and missing data.

    • FOBT, fecal occult blood test.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Bivariate Associations between Appalachian Residency and Screening Examinations, Kentucky Residents 2008

    Frequency*Percent ScreenedP (χ2)
    Women, age ≥23 years with no hysterectomy
        Papanicolaou test within 2 years
            Appalachian10870.5.11
            Non-Appalachian34477.9
        Pap test within 3 years
            Appalachian10875.9.11
            Non-Appalachian34484.6
    Women, age ≥42 years
        Regular mammograms
            Appalachian11472.8.04
            Non-Appalachian40581.7
        Mammography within 2 years
            Appalachian12273.0.57
            Non-Appalachian42775.9
    Men and women, age ≥52 years
        FOBT within 2 years
            Appalachian13525.2.01
            Non-Appalachian49419.8
        Colonoscopy/ sigmoidoscopy within 10 years
            Appalachian13649.3.0007
            Non-Appalachian49467.0
    • Bold values indicate P≤ .05.

    • ↵* Frequency differs across strata because of age and sex eligibility requirements and missing data.

    • FOBT, fecal occult blood testing.

    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Bivariate Associations between Diabetes Status* and Screening Examinations for Those in and outside of Appalachia, Kentucky Residents 2008

    Screening TestAppalachian ResidentNon-Appalachian Resident
    Frequency†%ScreenedP (χ2)Frequency†%ScreenedP (χ2)
    Women, age ≥23 years
        Papanicolaou test within 2 years
            With diabetes1560.0.344269.1.11
            Without diabetes9072.228379.9
        Papanicolaou test within 3 years
            With diabetes1560.0.114273.8.03
            Without diabetes9078.928386.6
    Women, age ≥42 years
        Regular mammography
            With diabetes2259.0.126672.7.05
            Without diabetes8775.931383.1
        Mammography within 2 years
            With diabetes2365.2.377067.1.07
            Without diabetes9474.532877.4
    Men and women, age ≥52 years
        FOBT within 2 years
            With diabetes3228.1.569622.9.41
            Without diabetes10023.036619.1
        Colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy within 10 years
            With diabetes3141.9.469870.4.28
            Without diabetes10149.536464.6
    • Bold values indicate P≤ .05.

    • ↵* Patients with diabetes are subjects who have ever been told by a health professional that they had diabetes. Patients without diabetes are subjects who have not ever been told by a health professional that they had diabetes.

    • ↵† Frequency differs across strata because of age and sex eligibility and missing data.

    • FOBT, fecal occult blood test.

    • View popup
    Table 5.

    Multivariate Logistic Regression* of Six Screening Tests, Kentucky Residents 2008

    Screening TestDiabetes† (yes/no)Appalachian Resident (yes/no)
    Women, age ≥23 years
        Papanicolaou test within 2 years0.89 (0.46–1.74)0.78 (0.45–1.34)
        Papanicolaou test within 3 years0.62 (0.30–1.26)0.66 (0.36–1.22)
    Women, age ≥42 years
        Regular mammography0.56 (0.32–0.96)0.71 (0.43–1.19)
        Mammography within 2 years0.65 (0.39–1.08)0.93 (0.57–1.51)
    Men and women, age ≥52 years
        FOBT within 2 years1.44 (0.90–2.33)1.37 (0.85–2.20)
        Colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy within 10 years1.24 (0.81–1.91)0.54 (0.36–0.80)
    • Values shown as adjusted odds ratio (95% CI). Bold values indicate P≤ .05.

    • ↵* Controlling for education, race, and age.

    • ↵† Patients with diabetes are subjects who have ever been told by a health professional that they had diabetes. Patients without diabetes are subjects who have not ever been told by a health professional that they had diabetes.

    • FOBT, fecal occult blood test.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family     Medicine: 24 (6)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 24, Issue 6
November-December 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Diabetes and Cancer Screening Rates among Appalachian and Non-Appalachian Residents of Kentucky
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
7 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Diabetes and Cancer Screening Rates among Appalachian and Non-Appalachian Residents of Kentucky
Steven T. Fleming, Margaret M. Love, Keisa Bennett
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2011, 24 (6) 682-692; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2011.06.110094

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Diabetes and Cancer Screening Rates among Appalachian and Non-Appalachian Residents of Kentucky
Steven T. Fleming, Margaret M. Love, Keisa Bennett
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2011, 24 (6) 682-692; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2011.06.110094
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Where Can Colorectal Cancer Screening Interventions Have the Most Impact?
  • Change, Lack of Change, and Creating Optimal Change Out of Chaos
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Associations Between Modifiable Preconception Care Indicators and Pregnancy Outcomes
  • Perceptions and Preferences for Defining Biosimilar Products in Prescription Drug Promotion
  • Evaluating Pragmatism of Lung Cancer Screening Randomized Trials with the PRECIS-2 Tool
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire