Breast cancer screening (BCS) is a prevention strategy for breast cancer (BC) facilitating early detection and treatment. BCS has been shown to be effective in reducing BC mortality and minimizing the need for more extensive invasive treatments. Immigrant women's participation rate to BSC is lower than that of native women. Interventions to support their informed decision-making could make a difference to this. The aim of this review was to investigate the current evidence of interventions for supporting informed decision-making on attendance to BCS by immigrant women. An integrative review was conducted by searching online databases (Medline, PubMed, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Scopus). A quality appraisal of the articles was performed using Joanna Briggs Institute quality appraisal checklists and mixed method appraisal tool. Data were extracted and synthesized using narrative analysis. A total of 25 articles were included in the study. Interventional strategies for supporting informed decision-making on attendance to BCS by immigrants were home visits, personal navigation service support, education sessions, and media-led information. In summary, to ensure the effective adoption of interventions for immigrants, it is imperative to consider cultural and linguistic tailored interventions, involve family members, especially husbands, offer free BCS and navigation services to those with limited financial resources, and, most importantly, uphold women's autonomy in their decision to participate in BCS.
SiuAL. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med2016;164:279–296.
2.
World Health Organization. Global Breast Cancer Initiative Implementation Framework: Assessing, Strengthening and Scaling-up of Services for the Early Detection and Management of Breast Cancer. Geneva: WHO,2023.
3.
ColemanC. Early detection and screening for breast cancer. Semin Oncol Nurs2017;33:141–155.
4.
Mirzaei-AlavijehMGhorbaniPJalilianF. Socio-cognitive determinants of the mammography screening uptake among Iranian women Asian. Pac J Cancer Prev2018;19:1351–1355.
5.
WahidieDYilmaz-AslanYBrzoskaP. A comparative analysis of mammography uptake between migrant and non-migrant women in Austria-results of the Austrian health interview survey. Healthcare (Basel)2024;12:1468.
6.
DayNE. Overdiagnosis and breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer Res2005;7:228–229.
7.
Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Quality determinants of breast cancer screening with mammography in Canada. Toronto, ON: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, 2013.
8.
ForbesLJLRamirezA-J. Offering informed choice about breast screening. J Med Screen2014;21:194–200.
9.
Pérez-LacastaMJMartínez-AlonsoM, et al.Effect of information about the benefits and harms of mammography on women’s decision making: the InforMa randomised controlled trial. PLoS One2019;14:e0214057.
10.
International Organization for Migration (IOM). World Migration Report 2022. Geneva: IOM, 2022.
11.
BhattJBathijaP. Ensuring access to quality health care in vulnerable communities. Acad Med2018;93:1271–1275.
12.
LuMMoritzSLorenzettiD, et al.A systematic review of interventions to increase breast and cervical cancer screening uptake among Asian women. BMC Public Health2012;12:413.
13.
HanHRLeeJEKimJ, et al.A meta-analysis of interventions to promote mammography among ethnic minority women. Nurs Res2009;58:246–254.
14.
WhittemoreRKnaflK. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs2005;52:546–553.
15.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med2009;6:e1000097.
16.
HarrisonHGriffinSJKuhnI, et al.Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation. BMC Med Res Methodol2020;20:7.
17.
BarkerTHStoneJCSearsK, et al.The revised JBI critical appraisal tool for the assessment of risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. JBI Evidence Synthesis2023;21:494–506.
18.
TufanaruCMunnZAromatarisE, et al.Chapter 3: Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In: AromatarisEMunnZ (eds) JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Adelaide, South Australia: JBI, 2020.
19.
PopenoeRLangius-EklöfAStenwallE, et al.A practical guide to data analysis in general literature reviews. Nordic Journal of Nursing Research2021;41:175–186.
20.
HongQNFàbreguesSBartlettG, et al.The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version or information professionals and researchers. Educ Inf2018;34:285–291.
21.
PopayJRobertsHSowdenA, et al.Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. A product from the ESRC Methods Programme. Lancaster, UK: Institute for Health Research, Lancaster University, 2006.
22.
Percac-LimaSAshburnerJMBondB, et al.Decreasing disparities in breast cancer screening in refugee women using culturally tailored patient navigation. J Gen Intern Med2013;28:1463–1468.
23.
TahaHNyströmLAl-QutobR, et al.Home visits to improve breast health knowledge and screening practices in a less privileged area in Jordan. BMC Public Health2014;14:428.
24.
Percac-LimaSMilosavljevicBOoSA, et al.Patient navigation to improve breast cancer screening in Bosnian refugees and immigrants. J Immigr Minor Health2012;14:727–730.
25.
Rodriguez-TorresSAMcCarthyAMHeW, et al.Long-term impact of a culturally tailored patient navigation program on disparities in breast cancer screening in refugee women after the program’s end. Health Equity2019;3:205–210.
26.
TanNQPMaGXMaxwellAE, et al.The impact of a small-group mammography video discussion on promoting screening uptake among nonadherent Chinese American immigrant women: a randomized controlled trial. Cancer2025;131:e35524.
27.
HanHRLeeHKimMT, et al.Tailored lay health worker intervention improves breast cancer screening outcomes in non-adherent Korean-American women. Health Educ Res2009;24:318–329.
28.
AitaotoNBraunKLEstrellaJ, et al.Design and results of a culturally tailored cancer outreach project by and for Micronesian women. Prev Chronic Dis2012;9:E82.
29.
GondekMShoganMSaad-HarfoucheFG, et al.Engaging immigrant and refugee women in breast health education. J Cancer Educ2015;30:593–598.
30.
LeeEMenonUNandyK, et al.The effect of a couples intervention to increase breast cancer screening among Korean Americans. Oncol Nurs Forum2014;41:E185–E193.
31.
KamarajuSDeNomieMVisotckyA, et al.Increasing mammography uptake through academic-community partnerships targeting immigrant and refugee communities in Milwaukee. WMJ2018;117:55–61.
32.
Lee-LinFNguyenTPedhiwalaN, et al.A breast health educational program for Chinese-American women: 3- to 12-month postintervention effect. Am J Health Promot2015;29:173–181.
33.
CalderónJLBazarganMSangasubanaN, et al.A comparison of two educational methods on immigrant Latinas breast cancer knowledge and screening behaviors. J Health Care Poor Underserved2010;21:76–90.
34.
LeeHGhebreRLeC, et al.Mobile phone multilevel and multimedia messaging intervention for breast cancer screening: pilot randomized controlled trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth2017:5:e154.
35.
LeeHYLeeMHGaoZ, et al.Development and evaluation of culturally and linguistically tailored mobile app to promote breast cancer screening. J Clin Med2018;7:181.
36.
De JesusMRamachandraSDe SilvaA, et al.A mobile health breast cancer educational and screening intervention tailored for low-income, uninsured Latina immigrants. Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle)2021;2:325–336.
37.
Lee-LinFMenonULeoMC, et al.Feasibility of a targeted breast health education intervention for Chinese American immigrant women. Oncol Nurs Forum2013;40:361–372.
38.
SilkoA. Increasing breast cancer screening in Russian immigrant women: identifying barriers and providing on-site mammography. J Dr Nurs Pract2017;10:71–78.
39.
WhiteKGarcesICBanduraL, et al.Design and evaluation of a theory-based, culturally relevant outreach model for breast and cervical cancer screening for Latina immigrants. Ethn Dis2012;22:274–280.
40.
JenkinsCNMcPheeSJBirdJA, et al.Effect of a media-led education campaign on breast and cervical cancer screening among Vietnamese-American women. Prev Med1999;28:395–406.
41.
SalinasJJByrdTMartinC, et al.Change in breast cancer screening knowledge is associated with change in mammogram intention in Mexican-origin women after an educational intervention. Breast Cancer (Auckl)2018;12:1178223418782904.
42.
NnoromOSappong-KumankumahAOlaiyaOR, et al.Afrocentric screening program for breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer among immigrant patients in Ontario. Can Fam Physician2021;67:843–849.
43.
Nguyen-TruongCKYPedhiwalaNNguyenV, et al.Feasibility of a multicomponent breast health education intervention for Vietnamese American immigrant women. Oncol Nurs Forum2017;44:615–625.
44.
WilliamsCGoulbourneEGyansaE, et al.Initiatives to increase breast and cervical cancer-related knowledge, screening, and health behaviours among black women. Can J Public Health2025;116:100–108.
45.
WyattLCChebliPPatelS, et al.A culturally adapted breast and cervical cancer screening intervention among Muslim women in New York City: results from the MARHABA trial. J Cancer Educ2023;38:682–690.
46.
AlkhaifiSPadelaAI. “I'm not alone; he will be there for me”: a mixed-method approach exploring the impact of spousal support on mammogram utilization and health beliefs. J Immigr Minor Health2024;26:257–267.
47.
AgideFDSadeghiRGarmaroudiG, et al.A systematic review of health promotion interventions to increase breast cancer screening uptake: from the last 12 years. Eur J Public Health2018;28:1149–1155.
48.
HeintzmanJHodesTParrasD, et al.The role of language in mammography orders among low-income Latinas over a 10-year period. Prev Med2023;175:107657.
49.
SabgulAAQattanAMNHashmiR, et al.Husbands’ knowledge of breast cancer and their wives’ attitudes and practices related to breast cancer screening in Saudi Arabia: cross-sectional online survey. J Med Internet Res2021;23:e25404.
50.
DahluiMGanDETaibNA, et al.Breast screening and health issues among rural females in Malaysia: how much do they know and practice?Prev Med2013;57(Suppl):S18–S20.
51.
MolinaYSan MiguelLGTamayoL, et al.The “empowering Latinas to obtain breast cancer screenings” study: rationale and design. Contemp Clin Trials2018;71:1–8.
52.
PlougTHolmS. The effects of nudging: the ethics of libertarian paternalism. Sci Eng Ethics2016;22:443–460.
53.
O’NeillO. Some limits of informed consent. J Med Ethics2003;29:4–7.
54.
ZagajaABoguszRSakJ, et al.Quality of informed consent in mammography screening—the Polish experience. Int J Environ Res Public Health2022;19:6735.
55.
DingLGreuterMJWTruyenI, et al.Irregular screening participation increases advanced stage breast cancer at diagnosis: a population-based study. Breast2022;65:61–66.
