Literature DB >> 8903128

Cognition and affect after cervical screening: the role of previous test outcome and personal obligation in future uptake expectations.

S Orbell1.   

Abstract

276 women aged 20 to 60 years who had recently undergone the cervical smear test for detection of cervical abnormalities were interviewed concerning their experiences at screening, the screening test and their future screening expectations. The vast majority of women indicated that it was very likely they would undergo future tests, in spite of recently publicised concerns about negative impacts of positive results. The analysis further demonstrated that future screening expectations were best examined not by appraisals of disease threat, but by a sense of obligation to attend and by perceptions of the aversiveness of the test procedure. Women who reported that their last test had been painful or embarrassing held more negative views of a future test, but a prior positive result was not implicated in women's expectations concerning future screening. Social class was associated with future uptake expectation, even amongst this sample of women who had already undergone the test. Multivariate analysis showed that the effects of social class on expectation concerning future participation in screening was explained by the tendency of lower class women to view the test as aversive and to feel less personal obligation to attend.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8903128     DOI: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00443-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  6 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.  '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

3.  After-effects reported by women having follow-up cervical cytology tests in primary care: a cohort study within the TOMBOLA trial.

Authors:  Seonaidh Cotton; Linda Sharp; Claire Cochran; Nicola Gray; Maggie Cruickshank; Louise Smart; Alison Thornton; Julian Little
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 5.386

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.  Inequalities in the incidence of cervical cancer in South East England 2001-2005: an investigation of population risk factors.

Authors:  Laura G Currin; Ruth H Jack; Karen M Linklater; Vivian Mak; Henrik Møller; Elizabeth A Davies
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Understanding the role of embarrassment in gynaecological screening: a qualitative study from the ASPIRE cervical cancer screening project in Uganda.

Authors:  Flora F Teng; Sheona M Mitchell; Musa Sekikubo; Christine Biryabarema; Josaphat K Byamugisha; Malcolm Steinberg; Deborah M Money; Gina S Ogilvie
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.