Literature DB >> 11180579

'I got a letter...' a qualitative study of women's reasoning about attendance in a cervical cancer screening programme in urban Sweden.

A Forss1, C Tishelman, C Widmark, E Lundgren, L Sachs, S Törnberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This explorative study aims at investigating how 'healthy' women describe and reason about participation in a cervical cancer screening programme in Sweden. The study is part of a multidisciplinary research project studying a population-based cervical cancer-screening programme from the perspective of different actors. SETTING AND METHODS: Data collection took place at three ante-natal health centres (ANHCs) in demographically diverse areas in the Stockholm region in spring 1995. Interviews were conducted and audiotaped with 66 'healthy' women at the ANHCs immediately before taking a Papanicolau test. Open questions such as 'Why have you come here today?' and 'What kind of test will you take?' were used to initiate the interview. Verbatim transcripts were analysed with a modified phenomenographical method to identify and describe qualitatively different ways of understanding cervical cancer screening.
RESULTS: Four different ways of reasoning about cervical cancer screening are described, with only one similar to the biomedical rationale for screening with focus on attending for the test/results. Two types of reasoning refer to the invitation letter as a catalyst, with one emphasizing benefits in attendance and the second emphasizing hinders to attendance. A final way of reasoning focuses on the individual's own proactive role in prevention. Common themes are also identified. IMPLICATIONS: This study complements the research literature by providing a better knowledge base of the variations in reasoning among women attending screening, often seen as a homogenous group. It can contribute to better adapting the screening situation to the varied needs and expectations of the women who attend. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11180579     DOI: 10.1002/1099-1611(200101/02)10:1<76::aid-pon496>3.0.co;2-p

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychooncology        ISSN: 1057-9249            Impact factor:   3.894


  9 in total

1.  Avoiding piecemeal research on participation in cervical cancer screening: the advantages of a social identity framework.

Authors:  Candice Tribe; Janine Webb
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Influence of hormonal contraceptive use and health beliefs on sexual orientation disparities in Papanicolaou test use.

Authors:  Brittany M Charlton; Heather L Corliss; Stacey A Missmer; A Lindsay Frazier; Margaret Rosario; Jessica A Kahn; S Bryn Austin
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  'I do not need to... I do not want to... I do not give it priority...'--why women choose not to attend cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Marie G Oscarsson; Barbro E Wijma; Eva G Benzein
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Community collaboration to increase foreign-born women's participation in a cervical cancer screening program in Sweden: a quality improvement project.

Authors:  Erik Olsson; Malena Lau; Svante Lifvergren; Alexander Chakhunashvili
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2014-08-09

5.  Non-attendance in mammography screening and women's social network: a cohort study on the influence of family composition, social support, attitudes and cancer in close relations.

Authors:  Åsa Ritenius Manjer; Ulla Melin Emilsson; Sophia Zackrisson
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-06-28       Impact factor: 2.754

6.  Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population.

Authors:  Fiona Devi; Peizhi Wang; P V AshaRani; Edimansyah Abdin; Yunjue Zhang; Kumarasan Roystonn; Anitha Jeyagurunathan; Mythily Subramaniam
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2022-08-09       Impact factor: 4.135

7.  Perspectives on cancer screening participation in a highly urbanized region: a Q-methodology study in The Hague, the Netherlands.

Authors:  Thomas H G Bongaerts; Frederike L Büchner; Matty R Crone; Job van Exel; Onno R Guicherit; Mattijs E Numans; Vera Nierkens
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2022-10-15       Impact factor: 4.135

8.  Women's perspectives on illness when being screened for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Lise Hounsgaard; Mikaela Augustussen; Helle Møller; Stephen K Bradley; Suzanne Møller
Journal:  Int J Circumpolar Health       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 1.228

Review 9.  Experiences of cervical screening and barriers to participation in the context of an organised programme: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.

Authors:  Amanda J Chorley; Laura A V Marlow; Alice S Forster; Jessica B Haddrell; Jo Waller
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 3.894

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.