There is a need for more knowledge about the public awareness and attitudes towards gynecologic cancers. We employed a research-purpose population-based citizen panel to assess how often people recall gynecologic cancers compared to other cancer types and to explore the relative importance of different information channels in relaying cancer information. Study design: We conducted an online survey using the Norwegian Citizen Panel (n = 1441 respondents), exploring associations between demographic factors and frequency of mentioning specific cancer types. We also searched The Norwegian Media Archive to assess the media coverage of different cancer types. Factors affecting likelihood of mentioning different cancers were assessed by multivariate regression. Results: Only 41 % of respondents listed one or more cancers in female genital organs. Of the gynecological cancers, cervical cancer was most frequently mentioned (28 %), followed by ovarian (12 %) and endometrial cancer (11 %). Female responders were more likely to mention cervical (OR 2.47, 95 % CI 2.16-2.78) and ovarian cancer (OR 2.09, 95 % CI 1.60-2.58) than male responders, but not endometrial cancer. Family and friends who have had cancer (50 %) and different types of media coverage (41 %) were reported as the most common sources of cancer information. The three most frequently mentioned cancer types in our survey were breast (77 %), hematologic (76 %) and lung cancer (75 %), which also were the cancer types having most media coverage. Conclusions: Gynecological cancers are less frequently mentioned by Norwegian citizens when compared to several other cancer types such as breast-, hematologic-and lung cancer. Sex and age are important factors that affect awareness of cancer types. Media is likely to play an important role in what cancer types the public recalls.

Background To provide value-based care for patients with multi-morbidity, innovative integrated care programmes and comprehensive evaluations of such programmes are required. In Norway, a new programme called “Holistic Continuity of Patient Care” (HCPC) addresses the issue of multi-morbidity by providing integrated care within learning networks for frail elderly patients who receive municipal home care services or a short-term stay in a nursing home. This study conducts a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to evaluate whether the HCPC programme performs better on a large set of outcomes corresponding to the ‘triple aim’ compared to usual care. Methods Prospective longitudinal survey data were collected at baseline and follow-up after 6-months. The assessment of HCPC was implemented by a novel MCDA framework. The relative weights of importance of the outcomes used in the MCDA were obtained from a discrete choice experiment among five different groups of stakeholders. The performance score was estimated using a quasi-experimental design and linear mixed methods. Performance scores were standardized and multiplied by their weights of importance to obtain the overall MCDA value by stakeholder group. Results At baseline in the HCPC and usual care groups, respectively, 120 and 89 patients responded, of whom 87 and 41 responded at follow-up. The average age at baseline was 80.0 years for HCPC and 83.6 for usual care. Matching reduced the standardized differences between the groups for patient background characteristics and outcome variables. The MCDA results indicated that HCPC was preferred to usual care irrespective of stakeholders. The better performance of HCPC was mostly driven by improvements in enjoyment of life, psychological well-being, and social relationships and participation. Results were consistent with sensitivity analyses using Monte Carlo simulation. Conclusion Frail elderly with multi-morbidity represent complex health problems at large costs for society in terms of health- and social care. This study is a novel contribution to assessing and understanding HCPC programme performance respecting the multi-dimensionality of desired outcomes. Integrated care programmes like HCPC may improve well-being of patients, be cost-saving, and contribute to the pursuit of evidence based gradual reforms in the care of frail elderly.

Norway has a history of tough assimilation of the first migration of Roma people, known as the Tater/Romani people. The state introduced laws that discriminated against the Tater/Romani people. This article traces the international and national developments from discriminatory laws to laws against discrimination in Norway. With the recent appearance of immigrant Roma from Eastern Europe, Roma are once again on the political agenda of West European countries. Despite the many laws against discrimination that are now in place, this article demonstrates that the public still discriminates against Roma people. Two survey experiments reveal that the Roma are being directly discriminated against within the Norwegian society and indirectly discriminated against compared to other European Economic Area (EEA) immigrants. The article suggests that this could be related to a history of antiziganism in society. Furthermore, it appears that such attitudes are not easily changed by laws but demands broad social mobilisation.

No abstract