ArticleJournal of medical screening2020
Offering an app to book cervical screening appointments: A service evaluation.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Investigating the national implementation of SMS and mobile messaging in population screening (The SIPS study).EBioMedicine · 2023Guideline
- Article
- The new NHS England 'ping and book' screening service is set to exclude thousands of women.Journal of medical screening · 2025Article
- Review
- 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
- Evaluation of Experiences and Attitudes of Patients Towards Patient Portal-Enabled Access to Their Health Information or Medical Records: A Qualitative Grounded Theory Study.Qualitative health research · 2023Article
- The Positive Effect of an Online Appointment Portal on a Breast Cancer Screening Program.Applied clinical informatics · 2023Article
- Automated patient self-scheduling: case study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Barriers to and Facilitators of Automated Patient Self-scheduling for Health Care Organizations: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Automated Self-Scheduling: Consensus from a Delphi Panel of Key Stakeholders.Perspectives in health information managemen · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the feasibility of offering women who are overdue for cervical screening the use of a smartphone app to book their appointment.
methodsWomen who were at least six months overdue for cervical screening in three general practice surgeries in a deprived East London borough were identified from practice records. Staff sent batches of text messages informing women that they were overdue for screening, and inviting them to download an app to book their appointment.
resultsAcross the three practices, 2632 eligible women were identified. Valid mobile phone numbers were available for 1465 women. One woman had opted out of receiving text messages, so messages were sent to 1464 women. Of these, 158 (11%) booked a screening appointment within five months. The majority of these women booked without using the app (72%; 113/158); just over a quarter booked via the app (28%; 45/158).
conclusionsJust over 10% of cervical screening non-attenders booked an appointment in response to a text message with a link to a downloadable app; however, only one in four of these women booked using the app. This suggests that the text message reminder was likely to have been the key 'active ingredient' for most women, rather than the app itself. Future research could explore the optimal message for a text reminder in this context and evaluate the inclusion of a link to existing online booking systems.
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.