Cancer screening

Barratt, Alexandra

doi:10.1136/jech.56.12.899

Cited by 35 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Barratt et al (2002) and Parkin et al (2008) screening uptake determines the success of a screening programme while Ramadas et al (2008) emphasise maximum participation rates as one of the essential components of a successful screening programme. According to Barratt et al (2002) and Parkin et al (2008) screening uptake determines the success of a screening programme while Ramadas et al (2008) emphasise maximum participation rates as one of the essential components of a successful screening programme.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating awareness and facilitating cervical and breast cancer screening uptake through the use of a Community Health Worker: a pilot intervention study

Tum

Maree

Clarke

2012

European Journal of Cancer Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In South Africa, cervical cancer is the most common female cancer followed by breast cancer. Despite the high incidence of these cancers, population-based screening is limited to cervical screening available at primary health clinics. Cervical screening uptake is, however, low. In 2009 a new cancer prevention initiative was launched in a specific resource poor community in Tshwane, South Africa. The low cervical screening uptake as well as a potentially low breast screening uptake could have resulted in the failure of this initiative. The purpose of the study was to develop and pilot test an intervention to address this risk. A Community Health Worker was trained and tasked to raise awareness of cervical and breast cancer and motivate women to take up screening. The intervention was assessed in terms of three outcomes: screening uptake, awareness and the value of the Community Health Worker. Despite the fact that the Community Health Worker's role was valued, screening uptake was disappointing and the level of awareness remained low. Unfortunately this intervention failed and once again we are left with the challenge of improving screening uptake.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating awareness and facilitating cervical and breast cancer screening uptake through the use of a Community Health Worker: a pilot intervention study

Tum

Maree

Clarke

2012

European Journal of Cancer Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to maximize the impact of screening programs, high test uptake and compliance to diagnostic work up are needed. Uptake represents the most important factor in determining the success of a screening programme (Barratt et al, 2002;Parkin et al, 2008). Many systematic reviews have looked at the evidence supporting various approaches to cancer screening uptake (Bonfill Cosp et al, 2001;Everett et al, 2011;Forbes et al, 2002;Jepson et al, 2000;Khalid-de Bakker et al, 2011;Palència et al, 2010;Vernon, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to increase uptake in oncologic screening: A systematic review of studies comparing population-based screening programs and spontaneous access

Ferroni¹,

Camilloni²,

Jimenez³

et al. 2012

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Levels of education, personal experience with cancer (self or others) and psychological status are all possible moderators of the psychosocial response to screening. Both researchers and clinicians' highlight the need to understand the potential psychosocial impact of screening programs, particularly in response to uncertainty associated with screening, procedures and results [10][11][12][13][14] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychosocial aspects of anal cancer screening: a review and recommendations

Landstra¹,

Ciarrochi²,

Deane³

2012

Sex. Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer screening programs have the potential to decrease psychosocial wellbeing. This review investigates the evidence that anal cancer screening has an impact on psychosocial functioning and outlines considerations for supporting participants. The review suggested that screening has no significant effect on general mental health but may increase cancer-specific worry. Having worse anal or HIV symptoms, being younger, higher baseline distress or worse histology results were predictive of greater worry. The findings suggest the need to increase education campaigns, particularly targeting those with HIV infection and men who have sex with men. There is a need to develop a consensus on measuring the psychosocial impact of screening and stepped care approaches for responding to any resulting distress. Abstract:Cancer screening programs have the potential to decrease psychosocial well-being. This review investigates the evidence for anal cancer screening having an impact on psychosocial functioning and outlines considerations for supporting participants. The review suggested that screening has no significant effect on general mental health but may increase cancer-specific worry. Having worse anal or HIV symptoms, being younger, higher baseline distress or worse histology results were predictive of greater worry. The findings suggest the need to increase education campaigns particularly targeting those with HIV infection and men who have sex with men. There is a need to develop a consensus on measuring psychosocial impact of screening and stepped care approaches for responding to resulting distress.3

show abstract

Cancer screening

Cited by 35 publications

References 22 publications

Creating awareness and facilitating cervical and breast cancer screening uptake through the use of a Community Health Worker: a pilot intervention study

Creating awareness and facilitating cervical and breast cancer screening uptake through the use of a Community Health Worker: a pilot intervention study

How to increase uptake in oncologic screening: A systematic review of studies comparing population-based screening programs and spontaneous access

Psychosocial aspects of anal cancer screening: a review and recommendations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About