Literature DB >> 19573798

Uptake in cancer screening programmes.

David P Weller1, Julietta Patnick, Heather M McIntosh, Allen J Dietrich.   

Abstract

For cancer screening programmes to bring about reductions in mortality, a substantial proportion of the population must participate. Programmes with low uptake can be ineffective and can promote inequalities in health-service provision. Strategies to promote uptake are multifaceted, reflecting differences in the cancers targeted, invitees, health-service contexts, and the tests themselves. Accordingly, there is no universal approach. Strategies should accommodate the many factors that can influence uptake and should incorporate the need to promote informed choice. Screening has the potential to cause harm, and there is an ethical imperative to seek out strategies that provide balanced information on cancer screening. Further research is needed to assess newer approaches to promoting uptake, such as IT-based programmes, and to identify strategies that are balanced, self-sustaining, and affordable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19573798     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70145-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  19 in total

1.  Longitudinal evaluation of physician payment reform and team-based care for chronic disease management and prevention.

Authors:  Tara Kiran; Alexander Kopp; Rahim Moineddin; Richard H Glazier
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Organized screening detects breast cancer at earlier stage regardless of molecular phenotype.

Authors:  Claire M B Holloway; Li Jiang; Marlo Whitehead; Jennifer M Racz; Patti A Groome
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-06-16       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 3.  Australia's national bowel cancer screening program: does it work for indigenous Australians?

Authors:  Aliki Christou; Judith M Katzenellenbogen; Sandra C Thompson
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-06-25       Impact factor: 3.295

4.  Use of text-message reminders to improve participation in a population-based breast cancer screening program.

Authors:  C Vidal; M Garcia; L Benito; N Milà; G Binefa; V Moreno
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 4.460

5.  Improving survival in colorectal cancer: what role for general practice?

Authors:  Greg Rubin; David Weller
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  Performance measures in three rounds of the English bowel cancer screening pilot.

Authors:  S M Moss; C Campbell; J Melia; D Coleman; S Smith; R Parker; P Ramsell; J Patnick; D P Weller
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 23.059

7.  Positive family history of colorectal cancer in a general practice setting [FRIDA.Frankfurt]: study protocol of a of a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Andrea Siebenhofer; Jasper Plath; Maja Taubenroth; Susanne Singer; Marlene Hechtner; Anne Dahlhaus; Sandra Rauck; Sylvia Schulz-Rothe; Insa Koné; Ferdinand M Gerlach
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Communication about colorectal cancer screening in Britain: public preferences for an expert recommendation.

Authors:  J Waller; A Macedo; C von Wagner; A E Simon; C Jones; V Hammersley; D Weller; J Wardle; C Campbell
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-11-22       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Predictors of adherence to screening guidelines for chronic diseases of lifestyle, cancers, and HIV in a health-insured population in South Africa.

Authors:  Leegale Adonis; Debashis Basu; John Luiz
Journal:  Glob Health Action       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 2.640

10.  Intermittent attendance at breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Padraic Fleming; Sinead O'Neill; Miriam Owens; Therese Mooney; Patricia Fitzpatrick
Journal:  J Public Health Res       Date:  2013-09-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.