Literature DB >> 22458292

Empowerment beliefs and intention to uptake cervical cancer screening: three psychosocial mediating mechanisms.

Aleksandra Luszczynska1, Alicja B Durawa, Urte Scholz, Nina Knoll.   

Abstract

Three studies tested if the associations between women's empowerment beliefs and intentions to attend cervical cancer screening could be explained by mediating psychological mechanisms: control-related beliefs, well being-related beliefs, and beliefs and evaluations referring to social functioning. Data were collected from January to March 2011 in the rural and urban areas across regions of Poland. Study 1 (N = 386) indicated that women with strong empowerment harbored stronger self-efficacy and beliefs that screening participation would make them feel in control of their own health and body. These two types of cognitions were, in turn, associated with stronger cervical cancer screening intentions. Results of Study 2 (N = 527) confirmed three significant well being-related mediators in the relationship between empowerment beliefs and cervical cancer screening: perceived benefits of screening related to well being, appearance satisfaction, discomfort- and shame-related barriers for screening. Finally, Study 3 (N = 424) showed that empowerment enabled receiving higher social support for cervical cancer screening, promoted perceiving fewer barriers for cervical cancer screening-related communication and more social benefits of engaging in cervical cancer screening. Support for cervical cancer screening, social barriers, and benefits were, in turn, related to screening intentions. Across the studies similar shares of intention variance were explained, and thus the hypothesized mediating mechanisms may have similar explanatory power.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22458292     DOI: 10.1080/03630242.2012.656187

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Women Health        ISSN: 0363-0242


  11 in total

1.  Community-campus partnership in action: lessons learned from the DuPage County Patient Navigation Collaborative.

Authors:  Athena T Samaras; Kara Murphy; Narissa J Nonzee; Richard Endress; Shaneah Taylor; Nadia Hajjar; Rosario Bularzik; Carmi Frankovich; XinQi Dong; Melissa A Simon
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2014

2.  Structural and sociocultural factors associated with cervical cancer screening among HIV-infected African American women in Alabama.

Authors:  Michelle Williams; Linda Moneyham; Mirjam-Colette Kempf; Eric Chamot; Isabel Scarinci
Journal:  AIDS Patient Care STDS       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 5.078

3.  Women diagnosed with HIV and unknown HIV status perceived susceptibility to cervical cancer and perceived benefits of cervical cancer screening in Ghana: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Nancy Innocentia Ebu Enyan; Selorm Akaba; Sarah Ama Amoo
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2021-10-17       Impact factor: 2.809

4.  The psychological impact of participating in colorectal cancer screening by faecal immuno-chemical testing--the Australian experience.

Authors:  A Bobridge; P Bampton; S Cole; H Lewis; G Young
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Is self-sampling to test for high-risk papillomavirus an acceptable option among women who have been treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia?

Authors:  Sonia Andersson; Karen Belkić; Miriam Mints; Ellinor Östensson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Barriers and facilitators for cervical cancer screening among adolescents and young people: a systematic review.

Authors:  Abirami Kirubarajan; Shannon Leung; Xinglin Li; Matthew Yau; Mara Sobel
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 2.809

7.  Self-sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus as a follow-up alternative after treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  Ellinor Östensson; Karen Belkić; Torbjörn Ramqvist; Miriam Mints; Sonia Andersson
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2021-01-31       Impact factor: 2.967

8.  The experience of under-screened and never-screened participants using clinician-supported self-collection cervical screening within the Australian National Cervical Screening Program.

Authors:  Nicola S Creagh; Claire Zammit; Julia Ml Brotherton; Marion Saville; Tracey McDermott; Claire Nightingale; Margaret Kelaher
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec

9.  Causes of late diagnosis of the reproductive organs' cancer in the opinion of suffering women from urban and rural areas of Lublin as an indicator of the condition of the early cancer detection system: a preliminary report.

Authors:  Renata Domżał-Drzewicka; Marianna Charzyńska-Gula; Zdzisława Szadowska-Szlachetka; Agnieszka Bartoszek; Andrzej Stanisławek
Journal:  Prz Menopauzalny       Date:  2014-06-30

10.  Predictors of cervical cancer screening intention of HIV-positive women in the central region of Ghana.

Authors:  Nancy Innocentia Ebu; Joseph Kwesi Ogah
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 2.809

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.