BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the response received by a population-based @entity0 screening program, according to three different invitation strategies: letters sent by mail from the program (program group), letters sent by mail from the Primary Health Care Team (PHT group), and direct contact through a trained professional (direct contact group). METHODS: We used a cluster-randomized controlled trial with assignment to invitation group using home address. Nine hundred eighty-six @entity1 of Barcelona (Spain), ages 50 to 64 years, were invited to participate in the program. The main outcome used was the response rate after the first invitation. RESULTS: Five hundred sixty-four @entity1 accepted the invitation (57.2%). The highest response rate was achieved in the direct contact group (63.5%), followed by the PHT group (55.6%), the program group being the one that attained the lowest response rate (52.1%). The direct contact group had a higher probability of participating than the @entity29597 group (RR = 1.14, P = 0.037) or the program group (RR = 1.22, P = 0.003). The response rate in the direct contact group was 72.1% when the letter was received by the subject herself. The increase in response occurred particularly among @entity1 of lower educational level. CONCLUSIONS: Inviting @entity1 to participate in a @entity0 screening program through direct contact by trained personnel increased participation rate compared with mailed-letter methods. The positive effect appeared restricted to @entity1 with lower educational levels.

A randomized controlled trial comparing three invitation strategies in a XXXX screening program.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['women'] @entity0 :: ('MESH:D001943', 'Disease') :: ['breast cancer'] @entity29597 :: ('CHEBI:26095', 'Chemical') :: ['PHT']
@entity0 :: (MESH:D001943,Disease) :: ['breast cancer']
