For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
11
views
34
references
 Top references
cited by
7
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      2,095
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Educational differences in likelihood of attributing breast symptoms to cancer: a vignette-based study : Educational differences in cancer attribution

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Stage at diagnosis of breast cancer varies by socio-economic status (SES), with lower SES associated with poorer survival. We investigated associations between SES (indexed by education), and the likelihood of attributing breast symptoms to breast cancer.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups

          Mary Dixon-Woods, Debbie Cavers, Shona Agarwal … (2006)
          Background Conventional systematic review techniques have limitations when the aim of a review is to construct a critical analysis of a complex body of literature. This article offers a reflexive account of an attempt to conduct an interpretive review of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups in the UK Methods This project involved the development and use of the method of Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS). This approach is sensitised to the processes of conventional systematic review methodology and draws on recent advances in methods for interpretive synthesis. Results Many analyses of equity of access have rested on measures of utilisation of health services, but these are problematic both methodologically and conceptually. A more useful means of understanding access is offered by the synthetic construct of candidacy. Candidacy describes how people's eligibility for healthcare is determined between themselves and health services. It is a continually negotiated property of individuals, subject to multiple influences arising both from people and their social contexts and from macro-level influences on allocation of resources and configuration of services. Health services are continually constituting and seeking to define the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention, while at the same time people are engaged in constituting and defining what they understand to be the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention. Access represents a dynamic interplay between these simultaneous, iterative and mutually reinforcing processes. By attending to how vulnerabilities arise in relation to candidacy, the phenomenon of access can be better understood, and more appropriate recommendations made for policy, practice and future research. Discussion By innovating with existing methods for interpretive synthesis, it was possible to produce not only new methods for conducting what we have termed critical interpretive synthesis, but also a new theoretical conceptualisation of access to healthcare. This theoretical account of access is distinct from models already extant in the literature, and is the result of combining diverse constructs and evidence into a coherent whole. Both the method and the model should be evaluated in other contexts.
          Article 0 comments Cited 274 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Cognitive Interviewing

            Gordon Willis (2005)
            Book 0 comments Cited 191 times – based on 0 reviews
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Factors predicting delayed presentation of symptomatic breast cancer: a systematic review.

              S Sutton, P Littlejohns, Deborah C. Hay Burgess … (1999)
              Delayed presentation of symptomatic breast cancer is associated with lower survival. Understanding of the factors that influence delay is important for the development of strategies to shorten delays. We did a systematic review to assess the quality and strength of evidence on risk factors for delays by patients and providers. We generated hypotheses about the relation between each putative risk factor and delay, against which we tested studies. We did searches to identify papers containing original data related to risk factors for delays by patients (n=86) and providers (n=28). We critically appraised the papers for inclusion in the review according to predefined criteria. The small number of studies of adequate quality did not allow formal meta-analysis. We therefore assigned strength of evidence according to a combination of the number and size of studies supporting, not supporting, or refuting the hypotheses. Most studies were deemed to be of poor quality and were excluded. Among 23 studies of adequate quality, however, there was strong evidence for an association between older age and delay by patients, and strong evidence that marital status was unrelated to delays by patients. Younger age and presentation with a breast symptom other than a lump were strong risk factors for delays by providers. Moderate evidence was shown for several other factors. The strength of the current evidence is inadequate to inform the development of specific strategies to shorten delays by patients or providers. Clarification of the findings of this review through a major programme of primary research is urgently required.
              Article 0 comments Cited 117 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Title: Psycho-Oncology
                Abbreviated Title: Psycho-Oncology
                Publisher: Wiley
                ISSN: 10579249
                Publication date Created: October 2016
                Publication date (Print): October 2016
                Publication date (Electronic): June 16 2016
                Volume: 25
                Issue: 10
                Pages: 1191-1197
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Health Sciences; University of Surrey; Guildford United Kingdom
                [2 ]Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health; University College London; London United Kingdom
                [3 ]Department of Applied Health Research; University College London; London United Kingdom
                [4 ]Research Unit for General Practice, Research Centre for Cancer Diagnosis in Primary Care (CaP), Faculty of Health; Aarhus University; Denmark
                Article
                DOI: 10.1002/pon.4177
                PubMed ID: 27218858
                SO-VID: e6a3587e-31f7-4e7c-94de-bc14cd780517
                Copyright statement: © 2016
                License:

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History
                Product
                Self URI (article page): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pon.4177
                Self URI (pdf): https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1002%2Fpon.4177

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content2,095

                See all similar

                Cited by7

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors371

                See all reference authors