 Factors affecting non-response to cervical cytology screening in Norfolk, EnglandGraham Bentham, Jackie Hinton, Robin Haynes, Andrew Lovett and Chris Bestwick Social Science & Medicine, 1995, vol. 40, issue 1, 131-135 Abstract: A geographic information system was used to integrate information on the uptake of cervical cytology screening for general medical practices in Norfolk with other data on the characteristics of the practices and the population they served. Regression analysis was employed to explore the extent to which variations in non-response were associated with explanatory factors. Non-response to the earlier system of opportunistic screening was found to be associated with the size of practice, the presence of a female doctor, the District Health Authority in which the practice was located, the age structure of the practice population, its degree of socio-economic deprivation and levels of rural remoteness. Compared with the earlier system, the new population-based call and recall system was found to be reaching a larger proportion of the population at risk. The former relationships were weaker under the new system, but non-response was still significantly associated with both social and organisational factors. Keywords: cervical; cytology; screening; uptake; geographic; information; system (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:40:y:1995:i:1:p:131-135 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.