Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27769213›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2016

Cervical and breast cancer screening uptake among women with serious mental illness: a data linkage study.

Charlotte Woodhead, Ruth Cunningham, Mark Ashworth, Elizabeth Barley, Robert J Stewart, Max J Henderson

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 38 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Disability and Participation in Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Breaking down barriers to conversations about sexual and reproductive health.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Charlotte WoodheadInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Ruth CunninghamDepartment of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Mark AshworthDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Elizabeth BarleyFacility of Nursing and Midwifery, King's College London, London, UK.
Robert J StewartInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. robert.stewart@kcl.ac.uk.
Max J HendersonInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/J013471/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast and cancer screening uptake has been found to be lower among women with serious mental illness (SMI). This study aims to corroborate these findings in the UK and to identify variation in screening uptake by illness/treatment factors, and primary care consultation frequency.

methodsLinked population-based primary and secondary care data from the London borough of Lambeth (UK) were used to compare breast and cervical screening receipt among linked eligible SMI patients (n = 625 and n = 1393), to those without SMI known only to primary care (n = 106,554 and n = 25,385) using logistic regression models adjusted first for socio-demographic factors and second, additionally for primary care consultation frequency.

resultsEligible SMI patients were less likely to have received breast (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.69, 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.57 - 0.84, p < 0.001) or cervical screening (adjusted OR 0.72, CI: 0.60 - 0.85, p < 0.001). Schizophrenia diagnosis, depot injectable antipsychotic prescription, and illness severity and risk were associated with the lowest odds of uptake of breast (adjusted ORs 0.46 to 0.59, all p < 0.001) and cervical screening (adjusted ORs 0.48 - 0.65, all p < 0.001). Adjustments for consultation frequency further reduced effect sizes for all subgroups of SMI patient, in particular for cervical screening.

conclusionsWomen with SMI are less likely to receive breast and cervical cancer screening than comparable women without SMI. Higher primary care consultation rates among SMI patients is likely a mediating factor between SMI status and uptake, particularly for cervical screening - a service organised in primary care. To tackle health disparities linked to SMI, efforts at increasing screening uptake are key and should be targeted at women with other markers of illness severity or risk, beyond SMI status alone.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansLondonMass ScreeningMental DisordersMiddle AgedOdds RatioPopulation SurveillanceQuality of LifeUterine Cervical NeoplasmsBreast cancerCancer screeningCervical cancerData linkageMammographyPsychosesSerious mental illness

Identifiers

PMID27769213
PMCPMC5073417

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.