Literature DB >> 11394952

Reasons women do not attend screening for cervical cancer: a population-based study in Sweden.

S Eaker1, H O Adami, P Sparén.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: With an improved compliance with screening a larger reduction of cervical cancer incidence would be within reach. We aimed at investigating why certain women do not attend Pap smear screening and at validating the reliability of self-reported screening.
METHODS: In 1998 in the county of Uppsala, Sweden, information was collected through telephone interviews with 430 nonattendees and 514 attendees to Pap smear screening, who were all sampled from a population-based database. The women's recall of attendance was validated against the database. The main outcome measures used were odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS: Non-attendance was positively associated with nonuse of oral contraceptives (OR = 3.56, 95% CI 2.18-5.83), seeing different gynecologists (OR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.34-2.70), and seeing a physician very often (OR = 3.12, 95% CI 1.45-6.70) or not at all (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.09-2.90). Frequent condom use (OR = 1.88, 95% CI 1.02-3.47), living in rural/semirural areas (OR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.07-2.21), and not knowing the recommended screening interval (OR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.20-3.89) were all associated with nonattendance, whereas socioeconomic status was not, when tested in a multivariate model. Among the nonattendees, 57% underestimated the time lapse since last smear.
CONCLUSIONS: Seeing a gynecologist on a regular basis and information guiding women to have a Pap smear on their own initiative are important factors for recurrent screening. Therefore, information should be given to all women about the purpose and benefits of Pap smear testing. Self-reports on screening should be treated with caution. Copyright 2001 American Health Foundation and Academic Press.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11394952     DOI: 10.1006/pmed.2001.0844

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  27 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.  Decomposing income-related inequality in cervical screening in 67 countries.

Authors:  Brittany McKinnon; Sam Harper; Spencer Moore
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2010-12-14       Impact factor: 3.380

3.  Priority Setting for Improvement of Cervical Cancer Prevention in Iran.

Authors:  Azam Majidi; Reza Ghiasvand; Maryam Hadji; Azin Nahvijou; Azam-Sadat Mousavi; Minoo Pakgohar; Nahid Khodakarami; Mehrandokht Abedini; Farnaz Amouzegar Hashemi; Marjan Rahnamaye Farzami; Reza Shahsiah; Sima Sajedinejhad; Mohammad Ali Mohagheghi; Fatemeh Nadali; Arash Rashidian; Elisabete Weiderpass; Ole Mogensen; Kazem Zendehdel
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2015-11-22

4.  Does mailing unsolicited HPV self-sampling kits to women overdue for cervical cancer screening impact uptake of other preventive health services in a United States integrated delivery system?

Authors:  Hitomi Kariya; Diana S M Buist; Melissa L Anderson; John Lin; Hongyuan Gao; Linda K Ko; Rachel L Winer
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Immigrant women's experiences and views on the prevention of cervical cancer: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Maria Grandahl; Tanja Tydén; Maria Gottvall; Ragnar Westerling; Marie Oscarsson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-12-16       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Cervical cancer screening: knowledge, health perception and attendance rate among Hong Kong Chinese women.

Authors:  Sharron Sk Leung; Ivy Leung
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2010-08-09

7.  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.

Authors:  Rachel L Winer; Jasmin A Tiro; Diana L Miglioretti; Chris Thayer; Tara Beatty; John Lin; Hongyuan Gao; Kilian Kimbel; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2017-11-04       Impact factor: 2.226

8.  '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

9.  Cervical cancer in the screening era: who fell victim in spite of successful screening programs?

Authors:  B Folke Pettersson; Kristina Hellman; Roxane Vaziri; Sonia Andersson; Ann-Cathrin Hellström
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 4.401

10.  Sociodemographic gradients in breast and cervical cancer screening in Korea: the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey (KNCSS) 2005-2009.

Authors:  Mi Jin Park; Eun-Cheol Park; Kui Son Choi; Jae Kwan Jun; Hoo-Yeon Lee
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.