Utilisation of preventative health check-ups in the UK: findings from individual-level repeated cross-sectional data from 1992 to 2008

Labeit, Alexander; Peinemann, Frank; Baker, Richard

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003387

Cited by 49 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The utilisation of healthcare services such as these can reduce mortality and the incidence of illnesses (Sabates & Feinstein, 2006) as well as potentially reducing overall healthcare costs for the NHS (Labeit, Peinemann, & Baker, 2013). In addition, preventative healthcare provides individuals with knowledge and a sense of security about their own health and the health of their loved ones (Sabates & Feinstein, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s hard to reach the “hard-to-reach”: the challenges of recruiting people who do not access preventative healthcare services into interview studies

Rockliffe

Chorley

Marlow

et al. 2018

International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we discuss the challenges faced in recruiting “hard-to-reach” groups for interview studies, specifically those who do not access preventative healthcare services. We do this by reflecting on the varying success of different recruitment methods we have used in two recent studies; one investigating ethnic disparities in human papillomavirus vaccination uptake and another exploring difference in cervical screening non-participation. Engaging new community groups to help with recruitment proved particularly difficult, as did recruiting online. Our most successful recruitment methods included recruiting through community groups with whom we had previously established relationships, recruiting through schools and re-contacting participants who previously completed a related survey. We conclude that successful recruitment is dependent on study awareness and engagement. We urge others to be transparent in reporting recruitment methods in order to benefit the qualitative research community and suggest that details are published as supplementary material alongside qualitative articles in future.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s hard to reach the “hard-to-reach”: the challenges of recruiting people who do not access preventative healthcare services into interview studies

Rockliffe

Chorley

Marlow

et al. 2018

International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Individuals who live with another person 10 and those who have children 5 are more likely to be immunised against influenza than those who live alone: this probability increases with the number of daily social contacts 11 and participation in social activities 6 . Being married or living with a partner is also associated with participation in cancer screening;12, 13 however, evidence is conflicting with some studies finding no association or an inverse association between social connectedness and engagement in preventive health services 14, 15, 16. Marital status has been a focus of these studies, with the functional dimension having received much less attention than has the structural dimension, and studies of social support primarily only include women 17, 18.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social connectedness and engagement in preventive health services: an analysis of data from a prospective cohort study

Stafford

Wagner

Perman

et al. 2018

The Lancet Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBackgroundEvidence of the possible health benefits of social connectedness is increasing. We aimed to examine poor social connectedness as a possible barrier to participation in preventive health services among older people (aged 53–69 years).MethodsWe analysed data from a prospective cohort study of 5362 socially stratified births from the Medical Research Council National Survey of Health and Development enrolled in England, Scotland, and Wales in March 1946. At ages 68–69 years, participants reported participation in blood pressure and cholesterol measurement, eyesight and dental check-ups, influenza immunisation, and bowel and breast cancer screening. Our primary outcome measure summed participation across all these tests and services at ages 68–69 years. We tested associations between structural and functional social connectedness from ages 53 years to 69 years and total count of participation in these preventive services in Poisson models controlling for sex, education, occupational class, employment, chronic illnesses, and general practitioner consultations for health problems.Findings940 (44%) of 2132 participants attended all preventive services within the recommended timeframes. At ages 68–69 years, being unmarried or not cohabiting (incident rate ratio [IRR] 1·33, 95% CI 1·20–1·47) and small personal social networks (IRR 1·51, 1·32–1·71) were independently associated with non-participation in more services, with associations consistent across most services. High social relationship quality at ages 68–69 years (IRR 0·91, 95% CI 0·87–0·95) and increasing social relationship quality from ages 53 years to 69 years (IRR 0·93, 0·89–0·97) were associated with low risk of non-participation.InterpretationIndividuals with poor social connectedness appear to be at greater risk of not engaging in the full range of preventive services than individuals with good social connectedness. Improvement of access to social contacts and networks in older ages is already recommended for the maintenance of good mental health. This study suggests that social connectedness could also improve participation in a wide range of preventive health services, and hence could improve use of the health-care system and population health.FundingUK Medical Research Council.

show abstract

“…Smoking is correlated with more health risk taking behaviour and a weakened preference of individuals for health in comparison to non-health goods [25, 26] and women who smoke have poorer preventative health behaviour in general [27]. Smoking women have a lower probability of utilisation of healthcare services such a physician visits [28], and the predicted negative influence of smoking on screening examinations has been confirmed empirically [20, 29, 30]. An existing registration with a GP is a necessary condition to receive an invitation letter for the cervical cancer screening examination.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous existing research with the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) had analysed the uptake for cervical cancer screening examinations in two studies: Sabates et al (2006) analysed the uptake with an unbalanced panel until 2003 [14] and Labeit et al (2013) analysed the uptake with a balanced panel until 2008 [30] with a focus on previous screening history and other health related variables. Polisson (2011) analysed the uptake of GP visits in England using the General Household Survey (GHS) as a pseudo-panel: GP visit rates are determined by health status, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of a GP visit and cervical cancer screening examination in Great Britain

Labeit

Peinemann

2017

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveIn the UK, women are requested to attend a cervical cancer test every 3 years as part of the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. This analysis compares the determinants of a cervical cancer screening examination with the determinants of a GP visit in the same year and investigates if cervical cancer screening participation is more likely for women who visit their GP.MethodsA recursive probit model was used to analyse the determinants of GP visits and cervical cancer screening examinations. GP visits were considered to be endogenous in the cervical cancer screening examination. The analysed sample consisted of 52,551 observations from 8,386 women of the British Household Panel Survey.ResultsThe analysis showed that a higher education level and a worsening self-perceived health status increased the probability of a GP visit, whereas smoking decreased the probability of a GP visit. GP visits enhanced the uptake of a cervical cancer screening examination in the same period. The only variables which had the same positive effect on both dependent variables were higher education and living with a partner. The probability of a cervical cancer screening examination increased also with previous cervical cancer screening examinations and being in the recommended age groups. All other variables had different results for the uptake of a GP visit or a cervical cancer screening examination.ConclusionsMost of the determinants of visiting a GP and cervical cancer screening examination differ from each other and a GP visit enhances the uptake of a smear test.

show abstract

Utilisation of preventative health check-ups in the UK: findings from individual-level repeated cross-sectional data from 1992 to 2008

Cited by 49 publications

References 76 publications

It’s hard to reach the “hard-to-reach”: the challenges of recruiting people who do not access preventative healthcare services into interview studies

It’s hard to reach the “hard-to-reach”: the challenges of recruiting people who do not access preventative healthcare services into interview studies

Social connectedness and engagement in preventive health services: an analysis of data from a prospective cohort study

Determinants of a GP visit and cervical cancer screening examination in Great Britain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About