ArticleJournal of medical screening2018
Public understanding of the purpose of cancer screening: A population-based survey.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Barriers to Breast Cancer Screening, and of Interventions Designed to Increase Participation, Among Women of Black African and Black Caribbean Descent in the UK.Psycho-oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Acceptability of de-intensified screening for women at low risk of breast cancer: a randomised online experimental survey.BMC cancer · 2024Trial
- Acceptance, experience, and feedback for supplemental screening in dense breasts among women participating in the BRAID trial.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Acceptability of breast cancer risk assessment for women aged 30-49: Views of women from six under-served groups.PloS one · 2026Article
- Behind the Screen: An Exploratory Study of Factors Influencing Breast Screening Uptake in Lancashire (UK).Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Article
- How do young women approaching screening age interpret the NHS cervical screening leaflet? A mixed methods study of identifying interpretation difficulties, barriers, facilitators, and leaflet interpretation, engagement and future screening behaviour.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- Unpacking the Lay Epidemiology of Cervical Cancer: A Focus Group Study on the Perceptions of Cervical Cancer and Its Prevention among Women Late for Screening in Norway.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Understanding Public Attitudes and Willingness to Share Commercial Data for Health Research: Survey Study in the United Kingdom.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Article
- Revisiting Candidacy: What Might It Offer Cancer Prevention?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Organized Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening: Attendance and Determinants in Southern Italy.Cancers · 2021Article
- Concurrent participation in screening for cervical, breast, and bowel cancer in England.Journal of medical screening · 2020Article
- How Do Women Interpret the NHS Information Leaflet about Cervical Cancer Screening?Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2019Article
- Which indicators of early cancer diagnosis from population-based data sources are associated with short-term mortality and survival?Cancer epidemiology · 2018Article
- Attendance to cervical cancer screening among Roma and non-Roma women living in North-Western region of Romania.International journal of public health · 2018Article
- Epidemiology of HPV Infection and HPV-Related Cancers in Kazakhstan: a ReviewAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Review
- Informed choices for some, but not for others: An exploration of Australian midlife women's participation in mammography screening by social class.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives In examining informed choice in cancer screening, we investigated public awareness that some screening programmes aim to prevent cancer, while others seek to detect cancer at an early stage. Methods A population-based survey of adults aged 50-70 in England (n = 1433), including data on demographic characteristics and screening experience. Participants were asked to select the main purpose of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening (both faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy). Results Across all four screening programmes, most people thought the main aim was to catch cancer early (71-78%). Only 18 and 14% knew that cervical screening and flexible sigmoidoscopy, respectively, are primarily preventive. Knowledge of the preventive aspect of these two programmes was low across the board, with few demographic patterns. By contrast, 78 and 73% of the sample were aware that breast screening and the faecal occult blood test, respectively, predominantly aim to detect cancer early. For these programmes, accurate knowledge was socially graded, lower in ethnic minority groups, and positively associated with previous participation in the programmes. Conclusions Our findings suggest that although awareness of the purpose of early detection screening is high, awareness that screening can prevent cancer is low across all demographic groups. Understanding the purpose of screening is a key aspect of informed choice but despite current communication strategies highlighting these differences, people do not seem to have a nuanced understanding of these differing aims. Our findings may be indicative of a broader public scepticism about the preventability of cancer.
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.