Screening status was strongly associated with subtype and this association persisted after adjustment for covariates including tumour stage and grade. After correcting for lead-time bias and adjusting for stage, subtype, grade and socio-demographic variables, no significant survival difference was demonstrated for women with screen-detected cancer in the 5-year period post-diagnosis. Since we are adjusting for stage, subtype and other variables, the lack of difference between these groups would be expected but has not been demonstrated in studies which do not correct for lead time bias.

Background Effective screening can prevent cervical cancer, but many women choose not to attend their screening tests. Objective This study aimed to investigate behavioural influences on cervical screening participation using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and COM‐B models of behaviour change. Design A qualitative study and semistructured phone interviews were conducted with women invited for routine screening tests within the national cervical screening programme in Ireland. Setting and Participants Forty‐eight women aged 25–65 years were recruited from the national screening register. Results Seven core themes were identified that mapped to three COM‐B components and 11 TDF domains: (1) knowledge of cervical cancer and screening, (2) coping with smear tests, (3) competing motivational processes—automatic and reflective, (4) cognitive resources, (5) role of social support, (6) environmental influences and (7) perceputal and practical influences. A range of knowledge about screening, perceived risk of cervical cancer and human papillomavirus infection was evident. Factors that influenced screening behaviours may be hierarchical—some were assigned greater importance than others. Positive screening behaviours were linked to autonomous motivation. Deficits in physical and psychological capability (inadequate coping skills) were barriers to screening, while physical and social opportunity (e.g. healthcare professional ‘champions’) could facilitate participation. Older women raised age‐related issues (e.g. screening no longer necessary) and had more negative attitudes to screening, while younger women identified practical barriers. Conclusions This study provides insight into screening participation and will aid development of theoretically informed interventions to increase uptake. Patient or Public Contribution Women invited for screening tests through the national screening programme were interviewed. A Public & Patient Involvement (PPI) Panel, established to provide input into all CERVIVA research projects, advised the research team on recruitment materials and were given the opportunity to review and comment on the interview topic guide. This panel is made up of six women with various cervical screening histories and experiences.

Introduction International studies on the effect of false-positive mammographic screening results on subsequent re-attendance at screening are inconsistent. Setting BreastCheck, the national breast screening programme for the Republic of Ireland, screens women two-yearly. Re-attendance for subsequent screening is approximately 90%. Objectives and Methods The aim of this research was to quantify the impact of false-positive mammographic screening results on subsequent re-attendance, using the BreastCheck clinical database with a decade of screening and to determine if age group, assessment procedure, initial or subsequent screening, location of appointment for next screening round and time from recall to non-malignant diagnosis predicted re-attendance.Results From programme commencement in 2000 to the end of 2007, 13,352 screening tests resulted in assessment; 11,765 participants were aged 50 -62 years and of these 9746 received false-positive results ( positive predictive value 17.2%). Following a false-positive recall to assessment, re-attendance at subsequent screening differed significantly by procedure type (open biopsy 80.3%; core biopsy only 90.2%; no tissue sampling 91.4%; P , 0.0001). Re-attendance differed significantly by timing of false-positive assessment in a woman's screening history (first versus subsequent screening, 89.5% versus 93.5%, P , 0.0001) and by location of next screening appointment (screening centre 89.8% versus mobile unit 91.3%, P , 0.01). The longer the period between recall to assessment and non-malignant diagnosis the less likely women were to re-attend. After logistic regression, first screening, older age, open surgical biopsy, re-invitation to screening centre and a longer period between recall and non-malignant diagnosis were significant negative predictors of re-attendance. Conclusion Since April 2008 BreastCheck has employed full field digital mammography throughout the programme, with a resulting increase in recalls; re-attendance will be closely monitored.

Colorectal cancer accounts for 11% of all cancerrelated deaths in Ireland. With the aim of diagnosing these cancers at an earlier stage, and detecting premalignant lesions, the National Screening Service (NSS) offered a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) to all individuals aged 60 to 69. All individuals in the age range were contacted by post and invited to participate in the programme. Those with a positive FIT result were offered a colonoscopy in an internationally accredited unit. From an eligible population of 488,628, 196,238 individuals participated giving an uptake of 40.2%. Commencing at a FIT threshold of 20 mg Hg/g feces, the positivity rate was 8.6%, which overwhelmed colonoscopy capacity and, thus, the threshold was increased to 45 mg, resulting in an overall 5% positivity rate. A total of 520 individuals had cancer detected (68.3% stage I or II), of which 104 were removed endoscopically (pT1s). Adenomas were present in 54.2% of all colonoscopies, 17.4% deemed high risk. Despite a lower uptake, males were twice as likely to have colorectal cancers as females and had a 59% increased rate of high-risk adenomas diagnosed. Challenges facing the programme include increasing participation, especially among males, and increasing colonoscopy capacity. The ability to alter the sensitivity of FIT to match colonoscopy capacity is a valuable option for such a programme as it ensures that the maximum public health benefit can be achieved within available resources.

Aims We aimed to determine the patient and screening-level factors that are associated with non-attendance in the Irish National Diabetic Retinal screening programme (Diabetic RetinaScreen). To accomplish this, we modelled a selection of predictors derived from the historical screening records of patients with diabetes. Methods In this cohort study, appointment data from the national diabetic retinopathy screening programme (RetinaScreen) were extracted and augmented using publicly available meteorological and geospatial data. A total of 653,969 appointments from 158,655 patients were included for analysis. Mixed-effects models (univariable and multivariable) were used to estimate the influence of several variables on non-attendance to screening appointments. Results All variables considered for analysis were statistically significant. Variables of note, with meaningful effect, were age (OR: 1.23 per decade away from 70; 95% CI: [1.22–1.24]), type 2 diabetes (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: [1.06–1.14]) and socio-economic deprivation (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: [1.09–1.16]). A majority (52%) of missed appointments were from patients who had missed three or more appointments. Conclusions This study is the first to outline factors that are associated with non-attendance within the Irish national diabetic retinopathy screening service. In particular, when corrected for age and other factors, patients with type 2 diabetes had higher rates of non-attendance. Additionally, this is the first study of any diabetic screening programme to demonstrate that weather may influence attendance. This research provides unique insight to guide the implementation of an optimal and cost-effective intervention strategy to improve attendance.