Cancer Communication and Screening Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, UCL, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
Basic Biobehavioral and Psychological Sciences Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, United States.
Prev Med. 2018 Jun;111:204-209. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.03.014. Epub 2018 Mar 15.
Understanding factors associated with different types of cancer screening non-participation will help with the development of more targeted approaches for improving informed uptake. This study explored patterns of general health beliefs and behaviour, and cancer-specific beliefs across different types of cervical screening non-participants using the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM). A population-representative sample of women in Britain completed a home-based survey in 2016. Women classified as non-participants (n = 839) completed additional questions about health beliefs. Some general health beliefs and behaviours, as well as cancer-specific beliefs, were associated with particular types of non-participation. For example, those who scored higher on fatalism were more likely to be unaware of screening (OR = 1.74, 95%CI: 1.45-2.08) or unengaged with screening (OR = 1.57, CI: 1.11-2.21). Women with greater deliberative risk perceptions were less likely to be unengaged with screening (OR = 0.74 CI: 02.55-0.99) and less likely to have decided against screening (OR = 0.71, CI: 0.59-0.86). Women who had seen a general practitioner in the last 12 months were less likely to be unaware (OR = 0.49, CI: 0.35-0.69), and those reporting cancer information avoidance were more likely to be unengaged with screening (OR = 2.25, CI: 1.15-4.39). Not wanting to know whether one has cancer was the only factor associated with all types of non-participation. Interventions to raise awareness of screening should include messages that address fatalistic and negative beliefs about cancer. Interventions for women who have decided not to be screened could usefully include messages to ensure the risk of cervical cancer and the relevance and benefits of screening are well communicated.
了解与不同类型癌症筛查不参与相关的因素,将有助于制定更有针对性的方法来提高知情参与率。本研究使用预防采用过程模型(PAPM)探讨了不同类型宫颈癌筛查不参与者的一般健康信念和行为模式以及癌症特异性信念。2016 年,英国的一个具有代表性的女性人群完成了一项基于家庭的调查。将被归类为不参与者的女性(n=839)完成了关于健康信念的额外问题。一些一般健康信念和行为以及癌症特异性信念与特定类型的不参与有关。例如,那些宿命论得分较高的人更有可能不知道筛查(OR=1.74,95%CI:1.45-2.08)或不参与筛查(OR=1.57,CI:1.11-2.21)。对审慎风险感知程度较高的女性不太可能不参与筛查(OR=0.74,CI:0.255-0.99),也不太可能决定不筛查(OR=0.71,CI:0.59-0.86)。在过去 12 个月内看过全科医生的女性不太可能不知道(OR=0.49,CI:0.35-0.69),而报告避免癌症信息的女性更有可能不参与筛查(OR=2.25,CI:1.15-4.39)。不想知道自己是否患有癌症是与所有类型不参与相关的唯一因素。提高对筛查的认识的干预措施应包括解决对癌症的宿命论和消极信念的信息。对于决定不进行筛查的女性,有用的干预措施可以包括确保传达宫颈癌的风险以及筛查的相关性和益处的信息。