• Patient satisfaction in the 2 interventions [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  
• CIS experience of patients in arm II and the effect of the intervention on their follow-up colposcopy [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  

• Attendance at a follow-up colposcopy appointment within 6 months of their Pap test [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  
• Latency between the Pap test and the colposcopy appointment [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  
• Number of CIS callers who provided the specific codes listed in the intervention letter [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  

OBJECTIVES:

• Compare the effect of a usual care mailing intervention vs a Cancer Information Service (CIS) support mailing intervention on the likelihood that women with an abnormal Pap test will keep their medical follow-up appointments and be satisfied with how they talk to their provider.

OUTLINE: This is a multicenter study. Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 intervention arms.

• Arm I (Usual-care mailing intervention): Patients receive a generic letter reminding them of their follow-up colposcopy appointment.
• Arm II (Cancer Information Service [CIS] support mailing intervention): Patients receive a targeted letter reminding them of their follow-up colposcopy appointment, asking them or someone they designate to call the CIS, and suggesting some questions to ask the CIS about colposcopies and Pap tests. At their follow-up appointments, all patients undergo an exit interview to compare patient satisfaction between the 2 interventions. Patients in arm II also answer questions about their CIS experience, and if the intervention made their follow-up visit less difficult.