ArticleJournal of medical screening2016
Socioeconomic inequalities in breast and cervical screening coverage in England: are we closing the gap?
Article in Journal of medical screening, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
55 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cervical cancer screening uptake in East Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Identifying optimum implementation for human papillomavirus self-sampling in underserved communities: A systematic review.Journal of medical screening · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening among underserved women in Europe.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Pooled it
- Factors associated with attendance at screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- The breast cancer paradox: A systematic review of the association between area-level deprivation and breast cancer screening uptake in Europe.Cancer epidemiology · 2019Pooled it
- Experiences of cervical screening and barriers to participation in the context of an organised programme: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.Psycho-oncology · 2017Pooled it
- Recruitment to the "Breast-Activity and Healthy Eating After Diagnosis" (B-AHEAD) Randomized Controlled Trial.Integrative cancer therapies · 2018Trial
- Effect of second timed appointments for non-attenders of breast cancer screening in England: a randomised controlled trial.The Lancet. Oncology · 2017Trial
- Black women's decisions about participating in breast cancer screening in the UK: a qualitative study.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Exploring Autistic People's Experiences of and Attitudes Towards Cervical Screening: A Mixed-Methods Study.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2026Article
- 'We know what the barriers are, but nothing changes' - Professional perspectives on promoting breast cancer screening initiatives for ethnic minority women.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- A guide to cancer screening.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Modelling the time to cervical cancer elimination in England: strategies for achieving elimination by 2040.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Enhancing Breast Cancer Screening Uptake: A Community-based Intervention in Southeast Wolverhampton, UK.Cureus · 2025Article
- A Population Survey on Barriers and Facilitators to Breast Cancer Screening Based on the Theoretical Domains Framework.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Women's perspectives of molecular breast imaging: a qualitative study.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Barriers and facilitators of integrating cervical cancer screening into routine HIV care and acceptability of self-sampling for HPV DNA testing among people with HIV: an exploratory study in southern Ghana.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Breast cancer screening coverage is severely reduced among women who reside in segregated areas: a cross-sectional investigation in Hungary.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Acceptability of artificial intelligence in breast screening: focus groups with the screening-eligible population in England.BMJ public health · 2024Article
- Risk stratification in breast screening workshop.BMC proceedings · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveHealth policy in the UK is committed to tackling inequalities in cancer screening participation. We examined whether socioeconomic inequalities in breast and cervical cancer screening participation in England have reduced over five years.
methodsCross-sectional analyses compared cervical and breast screening coverage between 2007/8 and 2012/13 in Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in England in relation to area-level income deprivation.
resultsAt the start and the end of this five year period, there were socioeconomic inequalities in screening coverage for breast and cervical screening. Inequalities were highest for breast screening. Over time, the coverage gap between the highest and lowest quintiles of income deprivation significantly reduced for breast screening (from 12.3 to 8.3 percentage points), but not for cervical screening (5.3 to 4.9 percentage points).
conclusionsEfforts to reduce screening inequalities appear to have resulted in a significant improvement in equitable delivery of breast screening, although not of cervical screening. More work is needed to understand the differences, and see whether broader lessons can be learned from the reduction of inequalities in breast screening participation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.