Abstract:Highlights
Screening is a major public health strategy in disease prevention.
Uptake remains suboptimal and current approaches fail to engage the most vulnerable.
Interventions to improve equitable access are urgently required.
A coherent model of screening behaviour is yet to be established.
The Integrated Screening Action Model (I-SAM) proposes an integrated theoretical model aiming to improve screening access for al… Show more
“…Once it goes to the lab, how long will it take before you find out whether you've got it?” 28 Planning (capability), Convenience/patient navigation (opportunity) GORD, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, BO, Barrett's oesophagus; OAC, oesophageal adenocarcinoma; EGD, conventional upper endoscopy; TNE, unsedated transnasal endoscopy; I-SAM, Integrated Screening Action Model. 17 Authors’ interpretations are shown in brackets. Figure 2 Integrated Screening Action Model focussed on OAC.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Figure 2 Integrated Screening Action Model focussed on OAC. 17 Predicted uptake was based on one included discrete choice experiment. 33 Physical discomfort scores were based on patient-reported outcomes in included studies; -/-, very low tolerability; –, low tolerability; +/-, medium tolerability; +, high tolerability; ++, very high tolerability (appendix pp 20).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Figure 3 Research directions for further study of the public's perspective on OAC screening, identified through comparison of review findings with the I-SAM. 17 …”
“… 16 This led to the identification of qualitative factors, which were subsequently linked to the Integrated Screening Action Model (I-SAM). 17 This model was developed to support understanding of screening behaviour and to identify targets for intervention. There are three key aspects to the I-SAM: (1) a sequence of stages that people pass through in engaging in screening behaviour, (2) screening behaviour is shaped by the interaction between participant and environmental influences, and (3) targets for intervention should focus on the sources of behaviour (capability, opportunity, and motivation).…”
“…Once it goes to the lab, how long will it take before you find out whether you've got it?” 28 Planning (capability), Convenience/patient navigation (opportunity) GORD, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, BO, Barrett's oesophagus; OAC, oesophageal adenocarcinoma; EGD, conventional upper endoscopy; TNE, unsedated transnasal endoscopy; I-SAM, Integrated Screening Action Model. 17 Authors’ interpretations are shown in brackets. Figure 2 Integrated Screening Action Model focussed on OAC.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Figure 2 Integrated Screening Action Model focussed on OAC. 17 Predicted uptake was based on one included discrete choice experiment. 33 Physical discomfort scores were based on patient-reported outcomes in included studies; -/-, very low tolerability; –, low tolerability; +/-, medium tolerability; +, high tolerability; ++, very high tolerability (appendix pp 20).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Figure 3 Research directions for further study of the public's perspective on OAC screening, identified through comparison of review findings with the I-SAM. 17 …”
“… 16 This led to the identification of qualitative factors, which were subsequently linked to the Integrated Screening Action Model (I-SAM). 17 This model was developed to support understanding of screening behaviour and to identify targets for intervention. There are three key aspects to the I-SAM: (1) a sequence of stages that people pass through in engaging in screening behaviour, (2) screening behaviour is shaped by the interaction between participant and environmental influences, and (3) targets for intervention should focus on the sources of behaviour (capability, opportunity, and motivation).…”
Objective: To describe the actions taken by recipients of mail-out faecal occult blood test (FOBT) kits and to identify the points at which progress towards kit completion typically stops. Differences according to gender, age, and screening intention were also examined.Methods: 1599 people completed an online survey identifying the actions they took upon receiving an FOBT kit. Latent class analysis was conducted to identify latent subgroups of participants that reported similar actions. Differences between gender, age, and intention status were assessed using non-invariance testing.Results: Four latent subgroups of FOBT invitees were identified: those who complete and return their FOBT kit ('completers'); those who bring the kit into their house but go no further ('ignorers'); those who open the package and read the bowel cancer information materials but go no further ('readers'); and those who read the instructions but do not place the kit near the toilet and do not complete their FOBT kit ('leavers'). Non-completers who intended to use the kit were most likely to be in the 'leavers' class, while those who had no intention were most likely to be in the 'readers' class.Conclusions: Distinct subgroups of non-responders exist among bowel cancer screening invitees, suggesting different behaviour change interventions are needed to facilitate participation. Some invitees, especially those with high participatory intention, are likely to benefit from prompts to take the kit into the toilet, while others, with little participatory intention, often read the invitation materials presenting an opportunity to intervene with health messages.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
