Background:There are wide international differences in 1-year cancer survival. The UK and Denmark perform poorly compared with other high-income countries with similar health care systems: Australia, Canada and Sweden have good cancer survival rates, Norway intermediate survival rates. The objective of this study was to examine the pattern of differences in cancer awareness and beliefs across these countries to identify where these might contribute to the pattern of survival.Methods:We carried out a population-based telephone interview survey of 19 079 men and women aged ⩾50 years in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer measure.Results:Awareness that the risk of cancer increased with age was lower in the UK (14%), Canada (13%) and Australia (16%) but was higher in Denmark (25%), Norway (29%) and Sweden (38%). Symptom awareness was no lower in the UK and Denmark than other countries. Perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation were highest in the UK, in particular being worried about wasting the doctor's time (UK 34% Canada 21% Australia 14% Denmark 12% Norway 11% Sweden 9%).Conclusion:The UK had low awareness of age-related risk and the highest perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation, but symptom awareness in the UK did not differ from other countries. Denmark had higher awareness of age-related risk and few perceived barriers to symptomatic presentation. This suggests that other factors must be involved in explaining Denmark's poor survival rates. In the UK, interventions that address barriers to prompt presentation in primary care should be developed and evaluated.

No abstract

ObjectivesTo develop an internationally validated measure of cancer awareness and beliefs; the awareness and beliefs about cancer (ABC) measure.Design and settingItems modified from existing measures were assessed by a working group in six countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK). Validation studies were completed in the UK, and cross-sectional surveys of the general population were carried out in the six participating countries.ParticipantsTesting in UK English included cognitive interviewing for face validity (N=10), calculation of content validity indexes (six assessors), and assessment of test–retest reliability (N=97). Conceptual and cultural equivalence of modified (Canadian and Australian) and translated (Danish, Norwegian, Swedish and Canadian French) ABC versions were tested quantitatively for equivalence of meaning (≥4 assessors per country) and in bilingual cognitive interviews (three interviews per translation). Response patterns were assessed in surveys of adults aged 50+ years (N≥2000) in each country.Main outcomesPsychometric properties were evaluated through tests of validity and reliability, conceptual and cultural equivalence and systematic item analysis. Test–retest reliability used weighted-κ and intraclass correlations. Construction and validation of aggregate scores was by factor analysis for (1) beliefs about cancer outcomes, (2) beliefs about barriers to symptomatic presentation, and item summation for (3) awareness of cancer symptoms and (4) awareness of cancer risk factors.ResultsThe English ABC had acceptable test–retest reliability and content validity. International assessments of equivalence identified a small number of items where wording needed adjustment. Survey response patterns showed that items performed well in terms of difficulty and discrimination across countries except for awareness of cancer outcomes in Australia. Aggregate scores had consistent factor structures across countries.ConclusionsThe ABC is a reliable and valid international measure of cancer awareness and beliefs. The methods used to validate and harmonise the ABC may serve as a methodological guide in international survey research.

These results show that socio-economic disparities in breast cancer survival prevail even in this relatively homogenous society, offering outreach mammography and standardised treatment regimens in a tax-funded health care system.

The aim of this study was to identify predictors of non-attendance in a population-based mammography-screening programme in central Sweden, on the basis of telephone interviews with 434 non-attendees and 515 attendees identified in a mammography register. Non-attendance was studied in relation to sociodemographic factors, indicators of general health behaviour, self-rated health and experience of cancer in others and own cancer or breast problems. Being single or being non-employed were the only important socio-demographic predictors of non-attendance. Non-attendance was more likely among women who never visited a dentist, had not visited a doctor in 5 years, had never used oral contraceptives or hormone replacement therapy, had never had cervical smear tests, never drank alcohol, smoked regularly, reported no breast cancer in family or friends or own breast problems. We conclude that socio-demographic factors alone do not appear to constitute strong predictors of non-attendance. General health behaviour and previous experience of cancer and breast disease seem to be more important factors. Our results suggest that in the setting of population-based outreach mammography programmes, previous contacts with the health care system and encouragement from health professionals represent determinants of attendance.