The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Jasmin Tiro to Early Detection of Cancer

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Jasmin Tiro has written about Early Detection of Cancer.
Connection Strength

9.383
  1. Process Mapping to Compare and Improve Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results in Two US Healthcare Systems within the PROSPR Consortium. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2025 Nov 03; 34(11):1989-1999.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.674
  2. Barriers to the Equitable Implementation of Risk-Based Cervical Cancer Management Guidelines. J Gen Intern Med. 2026 Feb; 41(3):759-766.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.654
  3. Delivering Guideline-Concordant Care for Patients With High-Risk HPV and Normal Cytologic Findings. JAMA Netw Open. 2025 01 02; 8(1):e2454969.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.636
  4. Evaluating Screening Participation, Follow-up, and Outcomes for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer in the PROSPR Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020 03 01; 112(3):238-246.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.455
  5. Cervical cancer screening among HIV-infected women in an urban, United States safety-net healthcare system. AIDS. 2018 08 24; 32(13):1861-1870.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.409
  6. Effects of program scale-up on time to resolution for patients with abnormal screening mammography results. Cancer Causes Control. 2018 Oct; 29(10):995-1005.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.409
  7. Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance Among Patients With Cirrhosis in a Population-based Integrated Health Care Delivery System. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2017 Aug; 51(7):650-655.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.380
  8. County-level outcomes of a rural breast cancer screening outreach strategy: a decentralized hub-and-spoke model (BSPAN2). Transl Behav Med. 2017 06; 7(2):349-357.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.376
  9. The colorectal cancer screening process in community settings: a conceptual model for the population-based research optimizing screening through personalized regimens consortium. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 Jul; 23(7):1147-58.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.306
  10. Failure rates in the hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance process. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2012 Sep; 5(9):1124-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.269
  11. Utilization of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance among American patients: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jul; 27(7):861-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.258
  12. Knowledge and intention to participate in cervical cancer screening after the human papillomavirus vaccine. Vaccine. 2011 Jun 06; 29(25):4238-43.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.245
  13. Gaps in care across the cancer screening continuum for cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2025 Dec 01; 117(12):2556-2570.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.169
  14. Guideline-Concordant Surveillance After Treatment for High-Grade Cervical Dysplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 2025 May 01; 145(5):461-468.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.161
  15. Cervical cancer screening rates in females living with HIV at three healthcare settings in the United States, 2010-2019. Cancer Causes Control. 2025 Mar; 36(3):275-284.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.157
  16. Association Between Clinician Confidence and Making Guideline-Recommended Decisions in the Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results. J Gen Intern Med. 2024 Dec; 39(16):3217-3224.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.154
  17. Assessing Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results and Concordance with Guideline Recommendations in Three US Healthcare Settings. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2024 Jul 01; 33(7):912-922.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.153
  18. Characteristics of Clinicians Caring for Transgender Men and Nonbinary Individuals and Guideline Concordance of Clinicians' Cervical Cancer Screening Counseling for Cisgender Individuals Versus Transgender Men and Nonbinary Individuals with a Cervix. LGBT Health. 2024 Oct; 11(7):563-569.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.151
  19. Strategies to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening With Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Kits: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2023 11 28; 330(20):1971-1981.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.147
  20. Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cervical Cancer Screening From Three U.S. Healthcare Settings. Am J Prev Med. 2023 10; 65(4):667-677.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.142
  21. Estimating Cancer Screening Sensitivity and Specificity Using Healthcare Utilization Data: Defining the Accuracy Assessment Interval. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2022 08 02; 31(8):1517-1520.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.134
  22. T Cell Receptor Repertoires Acquired via Routine Pap Testing May Help Refine Cervical Cancer and Precancer Risk Estimates. Front Immunol. 2021; 12:624230.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.123
  23. Anal Cancer and Anal Cancer Screening Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceived Risk Among Women Living With HIV. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2021 Jan 01; 25(1):43-47.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.120
  24. Considerations in Human Papillomavirus-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer Screening: A Review. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 07 01; 146(7):656-664.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.116
  25. Cost-effectiveness studies of HPV self-sampling: A systematic review. Prev Med. 2020 03; 132:105953.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.112
  26. Reactions of women underscreened for cervical cancer who received unsolicited human papillomavirus self-sampling kits. J Med Screen. 2020 09; 27(3):146-156.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.111
  27. Cervical cancer screening research in the PROSPR I consortium: Rationale, methods and baseline findings from a US cohort. Int J Cancer. 2019 03 15; 144(6):1460-1473.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.105
  28. Mailed Outreach Invitations Significantly Improve HCC Surveillance Rates in Patients With Cirrhosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Hepatology. 2019 01; 69(1):121-130.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.104
  29. Understanding Patients' Perspectives and Information Needs Following a Positive Home Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Kit Result. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2019 03; 28(3):384-392.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.104
  30. Cervical Cancer Burden and Opportunities for Prevention in a Safety-Net Healthcare System. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2018 12; 27(12):1398-1406.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.103
  31. Social Disadvantage, Healthcare Utilization, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Leveraging Longitudinal Patient Address and Health Records Data. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2018 12; 27(12):1424-1432.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.102
  32. Patterns and predictors of repeat fecal immunochemical and occult blood test screening in four large health care systems in the United States. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018 05; 113(5):746-754.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.099
  33. Effect of Colonoscopy Outreach vs Fecal Immunochemical Test Outreach on Colorectal Cancer Screening Completion: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017 09 05; 318(9):806-815.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.096
  34. An assessment of benefits and harms of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2017 04; 65(4):1196-1205.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.091
  35. Assessing local capacity to expand rural breast cancer screening and patient navigation: An iterative mixed-method tool. Eval Program Plann. 2017 04; 61:113-124.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.091
  36. Mailed Outreach Program Increases Ultrasound Screening of Patients With Cirrhosis for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2017 02; 152(3):608-615.e4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.090
  37. Patient-reported barriers are associated with lower hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance rates in patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2017 03; 65(3):875-884.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.090
  38. Population-Based Precision Cancer Screening: A Symposium on Evidence, Epidemiology, and Next Steps. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016 11; 25(11):1449-1455.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.089
  39. Characterizing safety-net providers' HPV vaccine recommendations to undecided parents: A pilot study. Patient Educ Couns. 2016 09; 99(9):1452-60.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.088
  40. Variation in Screening Abnormality Rates and Follow-Up of Breast, Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screening within the PROSPR Consortium. J Gen Intern Med. 2016 Apr; 31(4):372-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.087
  41. Use of Health Behavior Theory in Funded Grant Proposals: Cancer Screening Interventions as a Case Study. Ann Behav Med. 2015 Dec; 49(6):809-18.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.085
  42. Outreach invitations for FIT and colonoscopy improve colorectal cancer screening rates: A randomized controlled trial in a safety-net health system. Cancer. 2016 Feb 01; 122(3):456-63.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.084
  43. Unifying screening processes within the PROSPR consortium: a conceptual model for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Jun; 107(6):djv120.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.081
  44. Practice patterns and attitudes of primary care providers and barriers to surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Apr; 13(4):791-8.e1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.077
  45. Improving hepatocellular carcinoma screening: applying lessons from colorectal cancer screening. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 May; 11(5):472-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.069
  46. Interventions to promote repeat breast cancer screening with mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Jul 21; 102(14):1023-39.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.058
  47. Economic Evaluation of Mailed Home-Based Human Papillomavirus Self-sampling Kits for Cervical Cancer Screening. JAMA Netw Open. 2023 03 01; 6(3):e234052.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  48. Provider beliefs in effectiveness and recommendations for primary HPV testing inĀ 3 health-care systems. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2023 01 03; 7(1).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  49. Effect of Patient Characteristics on Uptake of Screening Using a Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-sampling Kit: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2022 11 01; 5(11):e2244343.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  50. Factors associated with timely colposcopy following an abnormal cervical cancer test result. Prev Med. 2022 11; 164:107307.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  51. Design of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of home-based human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake in a U.S. healthcare system: The STEP trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2022 11; 122:106960.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  52. Gaps in the screening process for women diagnosed with cervical cancer in four diverse US health care settings. Cancer Med. 2023 02; 12(3):3705-3717.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  53. Evaluating and Improving Cancer Screening Process Quality in a Multilevel Context: The PROSPR II Consortium Design and Research Agenda. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2022 08 02; 31(8):1521-1531.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  54. Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of a Mailed Outreach Strategy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 12; 20(12):2818-2825.e1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  55. Variation in the receipt of human papilloma virus co-testing for cervical screening: Individual, provider, facility and healthcare system characteristics. Prev Med. 2022 01; 154:106871.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  56. De-implementation of cervical cancer screening before age 21. Prev Med. 2021 12; 153:106815.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  57. Anal cancer screening among women with HIV: provider experiences and system-level challenges. AIDS Care. 2022 02; 34(2):220-226.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  58. Out of reach? Correlates of cervical cancer underscreening in women with varying levels of healthcare interactions in a United States integrated delivery system. Prev Med. 2021 04; 145:106410.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  59. Patient-Reported Barriers Are Associated With Receipt of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance in a Multicenter Cohort of Patients With Cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 05; 19(5):987-995.e1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  60. Sex disparities in presentation and prognosis of 1110 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020 08; 52(4):701-709.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  61. Effect of Mailed Human Papillomavirus Test Kits vs Usual Care Reminders on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake, Precancer Detection, and Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 11 01; 2(11):e1914729.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  62. Rationale and design of the HOME trial: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of home-based human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake and effectiveness in a U.S. healthcare system. Contemp Clin Trials. 2018 01; 64:77-87.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.024
  63. Primary care visit use after positive fecal immunochemical test for colorectal cancer screening. Cancer. 2017 Oct 01; 123(19):3744-3753.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.024
  64. Reasons for Lack of Diagnostic Colonoscopy After Positive Result on Fecal Immunochemical Test in a Safety-Net Health System. Am J Med. 2017 Jan; 130(1):93.e1-93.e7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  65. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma at advanced stages among patients in the HALT-C trial: where did surveillance fail? Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 Mar; 108(3):425-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.