0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cervical screening uptake: A cross-sectional study of self-reported screening attitudes, behaviours and barriers to participation among South Asian immigrant women living in Australia

      research-article

      Read this article at

      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

          Introduction:

          Cervical cancer remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among women from low and lower middle-income countries, as well as underserved population subgroups in high-income countries. Migration from South Asia to Australia has increased over the last decade, and immigrant women from this region have been reported as a subgroup, with less than optimal cervical screening participation in Australia. This study examined cervical screening uptake and associated behavioural attitudes among South Asian immigrant women living in Queensland Australia.

          Methods:

          A cross-sectional, Internet-based survey was used to collect data from a convenience sample of 148 South Asian women living in Queensland. The main outcome measure was receipt of cervical screening test ever (yes/no) and its recency (within 2 years/more than 2 years). The survey also examined participants’ views on barriers towards screening and ways to enhance it.

          Results:

          Of 148 women who completed the survey, 55.4% (n = 82) reported ever having a cervical screening test before and 43.9% (n = 65) reported having it in previous two years. Not having a previous cervical screening test was significantly associated with duration of stay in Australia for less than five years, not having access to a regular general practitioner (GP), not being employed, having low cervical cancer knowledge level and not knowing if cervical screening test is painful or not. Most commonly reported barriers to screening uptake included considering oneself not at risk, lack of time and lack of information. The most favoured strategy among participants was encouragement by GP and awareness through social media advertisements.

          Conclusion:

          This study provided insights into factors that need consideration when developing future targeted interventions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

          This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions

            Background Improving the design and implementation of evidence-based practice depends on successful behaviour change interventions. This requires an appropriate method for characterising interventions and linking them to an analysis of the targeted behaviour. There exists a plethora of frameworks of behaviour change interventions, but it is not clear how well they serve this purpose. This paper evaluates these frameworks, and develops and evaluates a new framework aimed at overcoming their limitations. Methods A systematic search of electronic databases and consultation with behaviour change experts were used to identify frameworks of behaviour change interventions. These were evaluated according to three criteria: comprehensiveness, coherence, and a clear link to an overarching model of behaviour. A new framework was developed to meet these criteria. The reliability with which it could be applied was examined in two domains of behaviour change: tobacco control and obesity. Results Nineteen frameworks were identified covering nine intervention functions and seven policy categories that could enable those interventions. None of the frameworks reviewed covered the full range of intervention functions or policies, and only a minority met the criteria of coherence or linkage to a model of behaviour. At the centre of a proposed new framework is a 'behaviour system' involving three essential conditions: capability, opportunity, and motivation (what we term the 'COM-B system'). This forms the hub of a 'behaviour change wheel' (BCW) around which are positioned the nine intervention functions aimed at addressing deficits in one or more of these conditions; around this are placed seven categories of policy that could enable those interventions to occur. The BCW was used reliably to characterise interventions within the English Department of Health's 2010 tobacco control strategy and the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence's guidance on reducing obesity. Conclusions Interventions and policies to change behaviour can be usefully characterised by means of a BCW comprising: a 'behaviour system' at the hub, encircled by intervention functions and then by policy categories. Research is needed to establish how far the BCW can lead to more efficient design of effective interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Cervical cancer worldwide

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing original draftRole: Writing review editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing review editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing review editing
                Journal
                Womens Health (Lond)
                Womens Health (Lond)
                WHE
                spwhe
                Women's Health
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                1745-5057
                1745-5065
                4 May 2022
                2022
                : 18
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Centre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Woolloongabba, QLD, Australia
                [2 ]School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia
                Author notes
                [*]Zufishan Alam, Centre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Level 2, Building 33, Princess Alexandra Hospital Campus, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia. Email: z.alam@ 123456uq.net.au
                Article
                10.1177_17455057221096240
                10.1177/17455057221096240
                9087249
                35509249
                efb5e8bb-bca9-429b-88c9-b22da5c04980
                © The Author(s) 2022

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                Funding
                Funded by: university of queensland, FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/501100001794;
                Funded by: Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship, ;
                Categories
                Original Research Article
                Custom metadata
                January-December 2022
                ts1

                australia,barriers,cervical cancer,immigrants,screening test

                Comments

                Comment on this article