Welcome to The Community Guide’s new website. Comments and suggestions on the site’s look and feel are welcome: communityguide@cdc.gov.

Cancer Screening: Reducing Client Out-of-Pocket Costs – Breast Cancer


What the Task Force Found

About The Systematic Review

The Task Force finding is based on evidence from a Community Guide systematic review published in 2008 (Baron et al., 8 studies, search period 1966-2004) combined with more recent evidence (0 studies, search period 2004-2008). The systematic review was conducted on behalf of the Task Force by a team of specialists in systematic review methods, and in research, practice, and policy related to cancer prevention and control. This finding updates and replaces the 2008 Task Force finding on Cancer Screening: Reducing Client Out-of-Pocket Costs – Breast Cancer [PDF - 784 kB].


There is no information for this section.

Summary of Results

Eight studies qualified for the original systematic review; no new studies were identified for the update.

  • Mammography screening: median increase of 11.5 percentage points (interquartile interval: 6.0 to 28.5 percentage points; 8 studies).

Summary of Economic Evidence

An economic review of this intervention did not find any relevant studies.


Findings should be applicable to various populations and settings in which people would accept screening but have limited financial resources.

Evidence Gaps

Each Community Preventive Services Task Force (Task Force) review identifies critical evidence gaps—areas where information is lacking. Evidence gaps can exist whether or not a recommendation is made. In cases when the Task Force finds insufficient evidence to determine whether an intervention strategy works, evidence gaps encourage researchers and program evaluators to conduct more effectiveness studies. When the Task Force recommends an intervention, evidence gaps highlight missing information that would help users determine if the intervention could meet their particular needs. For example, evidence may be needed to determine where the intervention will work, with which populations, how much it will cost to implement, whether it will provide adequate return on investment, or how users should structure or deliver the intervention to ensure effectiveness. Finally, evidence may be missing for outcomes different from those on which the Task Force recommendation is based.

Identified Evidence Gaps

The following outlines evidence gaps for reducing client out-of-pocket costs to increase breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening.

  • Are interventions effective for promoting colorectal cancer screening with methods other than FOBT?
  • Are interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening equally effective when addressing colorectal cancer screening more generally, as when specific to one type of test?
  • What are the incremental effects of adding intervention components to other interventions?
  • What influence do newer methods of communication (e.g., the Internet, e-mail, social media, automated interactive voice response, texting) have on intervention effectiveness?
  • What is the influence of health system factors on intervention effectiveness?


Study Characteristics

No qualifying studies were identified during the updated search period.