Little is known about women's preferred appointment times for cervical screening tests. Data from a postal questionnaire survey were used to compare preferred appointment times with those given. Although 33.4%[95% confidence intervals (CI) 31.8%-35.0%] of respondents received appointments between 10h00 and 11h55, only 17.0% (95% CI 15.3%-18.7%) wanted an appointment at that time. Nineteen per cent (95% CI 17.4%-21.0%) of respondents wanted appointments between 18h00 and 20h00, but only 4.4% (95% CI 3.7%-5.1%) received them. Saturday appointments for cervical screening are not given; however, overall approximately 13% of those surveyed would have preferred a Saturday appointment. Preferred times also varied significantly with age and deprivation category. Further research is required to determine whether appointment times for cervical screening can be tailored to meet these expressed needs, and the impact this has on service provision and uptake.

No abstract

We compared the information experience of women invited to attend cervical screening for the first time in 1994 and 2001 using postal questionnaires. Compared to 1994, women in 2001: found the invitation letter less easy to understand; were not aware of alternative venues for the test; and waited >4 weeks before receiving their results. Negative information experiences may influence attendance.

The findings add weight to the view that woman dentists tend to work fewer hours but studies of cohorts are required to examine the impact of premature retirement and the reasons behind this apparent gender difference.

In South Staffordshire, England, we compared women's views on information provided to them at different stages of the cervical screening program in 1994 with that provided in 2001. An age-stratified random sample of women aged 20-64 years who had a cervical smear taken between January and March 1994 (3856) or between January and March 2001 (4057) were sent postal questionnaires in June 1994 and July 2001, respectively. Response rates in 1994 (3124/3856, 81%) and 2001 (3288/4057, 81%) were similar. Compared to 1994, the proportion of women who thought the invitation letter was clear to read in 2001 increased (70% vs 98%, P < 0.0001); however, letters were thought to be less reassuring in 2001 compared to 1994 (P < 0.0001). In both study periods, 66% of women reported that the procedure was explained to them before the smear was taken. A greater proportion of women received their results by letter in 2001 compared to 1994 (57% vs 41%, P < 0.0001); however, 49% of women waited >4 weeks to receive their results in 2001 compared to 26% in 1994 (P < 0.0001). Bivariate analysis suggests that responses were age related, with older women (> or =45 years) experiencing poorer information provision. The issues highlighted by this study deserve further investigation in other areas.