Literature DB >> 16837520

Uptake of cervical cancer screening in The Netherlands is mainly influenced by women's beliefs about the screening and by the inviting organization.

Margot A J B Tacken1, Jozé C C Braspenning, Rosella P M G Hermens, Peter M M Spreeuwenberg, Henk J M van den Hoogen, Dinny H de Bakker, Peter P Groenewegen, Richard P T M Grol.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aims to examine the impact of women's characteristics (demographics, risk behaviour, and beliefs) on the uptake of cervical cancer screening, taking practice characteristics (demographic and organizational) into account.
METHODS: Routinely collected data of screening status were sampled from electronic medical records of 32 Dutch general practices. Additionally, a questionnaire was sent to a sample of 2224 listed women-1204 screened, 1020 unscreened. We used a step-by-step, logistic, multilevel approach to examine determinants of the screening uptake.
RESULTS: Analyses of data for 1392 women (968 screened and 424 unscreened) showed that women's beliefs about cervical screening and attendance are the best predictors of screening uptake, even when demographic and organizational aspects are taken into account. Women aged 40-50 years who felt high personal moral obligation, who had only one sexual partner ever, and who were invited and reminded by their own general practice had the greatest likelihood of screening uptake. A non-response study was performed; the non-responders to the questionnaire (mainly unscreened) thought they had less risk of cervical cancer, were less motivated, less often intended to get future screening, and were more convinced that cervical cancer cannot be cured.
CONCLUSION: To improve the uptake rate, we should focus on the personal moral obligation of eligible women, beliefs about the risks of cervical cancer, and available cures. Invitations and reminders within general practices enhance the uptake rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16837520     DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckl082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Public Health        ISSN: 1101-1262            Impact factor:   3.367


  18 in total

1.  Determinants of public trust in complementary and alternative medicine.

Authors:  Evelien van der Schee; Peter P Groenewegen
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 3.295

2.  Two controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of a mailed intervention to increase colon cancer screening.

Authors:  Carmen L Lewis; Alison Tytell Brenner; Jennifer M Griffith; Charity G Moore; Michael P Pignone
Journal:  N C Med J       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr

3.  Understanding the Low Level of Cervical Cancer Screening in Masaka Uganda Using the ASE Model: A Community-Based Survey.

Authors:  Cyprian Twinomujuni; Fred Nuwaha; Juliet Ndimwibo Babirye
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Cervical screening among migrant women: a qualitative study of Polish, Slovak and Romanian women in London, UK.

Authors:  Marta Jackowska; Christian von Wagner; Jane Wardle; Dorota Juszczyk; Aleksandra Luszczynska; Jo Waller
Journal:  J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care       Date:  2012-01-04

5.  Cervical cancer screening among university students in South Africa: a theory based study.

Authors:  Muhammad Ehsanu Hoque; Shanaz Ghuman; Roger Coopoosmay; Guido Van Hal
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Examining the Cervical Screening Behaviour of Women Aged 50 or above and Its Predicting Factors: A Population-Based Survey.

Authors:  Carmen W H Chan; Kai Chow Choi; Rosa S Wong; Ka Ming Chow; Winnie K W So; Doris Y P Leung; Wendy W T Lam; William Goggins
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2016-12-02       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Determinants of (non-)attendance at the Dutch cancer screening programmes: A systematic review.

Authors:  Thomas Hg Bongaerts; Frederike L Büchner; Barend Jc Middelkoop; Onno R Guicherit; Mattijs E Numans
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 8.  Non-participation in population-based disease prevention programs in general practice.

Authors:  Berber Koopmans; Mark M J Nielen; François G Schellevis; Joke C Korevaar
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  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

10.  Obstacles to the uptake of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings: what remains to be achieved by French national programmes?

Authors:  Jonathan Sicsic; Carine Franc
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-10-04       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.