Literature DB >> 6819038

Attendance at a breast screening clinic: a problem of administration or attitudes.

K French, A M Porter, S E Robinson, F M McCallum, J G Howie, M M Roberts.   

Abstract

In a study of why a sample of women, aged 45-64 and registered with a group practice in Edinburgh, attended or did not attend the Edinburgh Breast Screening Clinic demographic, aetiological, social, and perceptual characteristics of attenders and non-attenders were compared. Similar proportions of attenders and non-attenders knew the chance of a breast lump being cancer and were aware of the benefits of early diagnosis and treatment. The study, however, suggests that non-attenders saw the screening clinic as a place of risk while the attenders saw screening in a positive light: 79% of non-attenders as compared with 36% of attenders said that they were afraid of cancer being found, and most women attended either to reassure themselves that they had not got breast cancer or to receive early treatment if they had. Furthermore, 72% of non-attenders as compared with 13% of attenders were anxious that their lives would be disrupted if cancer were found at the screening clinic. There may well be an important irreducible element to non-attendance due to attitudinal factors; the ethical implications of attempting to eliminate this require careful consideration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 6819038      PMCID: PMC1499475          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.285.6342.617

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)        ISSN: 0267-0623


  9 in total

1.  Clinical and biochemical investigations of a variable-dose combined type oral contraceptive.

Authors:  M H Briggs; M Briggs
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  1977       Impact factor: 2.580

2.  Screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  W D George; E N Gleave; P C England; M C Wilson; R A Sellwood; D Asbury; G Hartley; P G Barker; P Hobbs; J Wakefield
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1976-10-09

Review 3.  Oral contraception.

Authors:  W C Andrews
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1979-04

4.  The reluctant participant in a breast cancer screening program.

Authors:  R Fink; S Shapiro; J Lewison
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1968-06       Impact factor: 2.792

5.  Androgens and sexual behaviour in women using oral contraceptives.

Authors:  J Bancroft; D W Davidson; P Warner; G Tyrer
Journal:  Clin Endocrinol (Oxf)       Date:  1980-04       Impact factor: 3.478

6.  Evidence for a food additive as a cause of ketosis-prone diabetes.

Authors:  T Helgason; M R Jonasson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1981-10-03       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Validity of clinical examination and mammography as screening tests for breast cancer.

Authors:  J Chamberlain; P Rogers; J L Price; S Ginks; B E Nathan; I Burn
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1975-11-22       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Acceptors and rejectors of an invitation to undergo breast screening compared with those who referred themselves.

Authors:  P Hobbs; A Smith; W D George; R A Sellwood
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 3.710

9.  Type I (insulin-dependent) diabetic multiplex families: mode of genetic transmission.

Authors:  A Walker; A G Cudworth
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  1980-12       Impact factor: 9.461

  9 in total
  20 in total

1.  Breast cancer risk and participation in mammographic screening.

Authors:  S Taplin; C Anderman; L Grothaus
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Determinants of non-compliance to recommendations on breast cancer screening among women participating in the French E3N cohort study.

Authors:  Camille Flamant; Estelle Gauthier; Françoise Clavel-Chapelon
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 3.  Understanding the uptake of cervical cancer screening: the contribution of the health belief model.

Authors:  S J Gillam
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  The impact of reminder letters on attendance for breast cancer screening.

Authors:  C Hayes; B O'Herlihy; M Hynes; Z Johnson
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  1999 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.568

5.  "I'd rather go and know": women's understanding and experience of DEXA scanning for osteoporosis.

Authors:  Jane C Richardson; Andrew B Hassell; Elaine M Hay; Elaine Thomas
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Older women's attitudes towards breast disease, self examination, and screening facilities: implications for communication.

Authors:  D S Leathar; M M Roberts
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1985-03-02

7.  Breast screening: a randomised controlled trial in UK general practice of three interventions designed to increase uptake.

Authors:  D J Sharp; T J Peters; J Bartholomew; A Shaw
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 3.710

8.  Non-attendance or non-invitation? A case-control study of failed outpatient appointments.

Authors:  S Frankel; A Farrow; R West
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-05-20

9.  Health checks in general practice: another example of inverse care?

Authors:  D Waller; M Agass; D Mant; A Coulter; A Fuller; L Jones
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-04-28

10.  Screening and self examination for breast cancer.

Authors:  J Austoker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-07-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.