Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25879731›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2015

Patients' willingness to attend the NHS cardiovascular health checks in primary care: a qualitative interview study.

Caroline E Jenkinson, Anthea Asprey, Christopher E Clark, Suzanne H Richards

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Reasons why people do not attend NHS Health Checks: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Involving people with type 2 diabetes in facilitating participation in a cardiovascular screening programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Engagement with advice to reduce cardiovascular risk following a health check programme: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Caroline E JenkinsonPrimary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2 LU, UK. C.Jenkinson@exeter.ac.uk.
Anthea AspreyPrimary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2 LU, UK. A.Asprey@exeter.ac.uk.
Christopher E ClarkPrimary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2 LU, UK. C.E.Clark@exeter.ac.uk.
Suzanne H RichardsPrimary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2 LU, UK. s.h.richards@exeter.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe NHS Cardiovascular Health Check (NHSHC) programme was introduced in England in 2009 to reduce cardiovascular disease mortality and morbidity for all patients aged 40 to 74 years old. Programme cost-effectiveness was based on an assumed uptake of 75% but current estimates of uptake in primary care are less than 50%. The purpose of this study was to identify factors influencing patients' willingness to attend an NHSHC. For those who attended, their views, experiences and their future willingness to engage in the programme were explored.

methodTelephone or face-to-face interviews were conducted with patients who had recently been invited for an NHSHC by a letter from four general practices in Torbay, England. Patients were purposefully sampled (by gender, age, attendance status). Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.

results17 attendees and 10 non-attendees were interviewed. Patients who attended an NHSHC viewed it as worthwhile. Proactive attitudes towards their health, a desire to prevent disease before they developed symptoms, and a willingness to accept screening and health check invitations motivated many individuals to attend. Non-attendees cited not seeing the NHSHC as a priority, or how it differed from regular monitoring already received for other conditions as barriers to attendance. Some non-attendees actively avoided GP practices when feeling well, while others did not want to waste health professionals' time. Misunderstandings of what the NHSHC involved and negative views of what the likely outcome might be were common.

conclusionWhile a minority of non-attendees simply had made an informed choice not to have an NHSHC, improving the clarity and brevity of invitational materials, better advertising, and simple administrative interventions such as sending reminder letters, have considerable potential to improve NHSHC uptake.

Indexed as

State MedicineAdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPrimary Health CareUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID25879731
PMCPMC4357194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.