Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30018
Appears in Collections: | Psychology Journal Articles |
Peer Review Status: | Refereed |
Title: | Effects of evidence-based strategies to reduce the socioeconomic gradient of uptake in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (ASCEND): four cluster-randomised controlled trials |
Author(s): | Wardle, Jane von Wagner, Christian Kralj-Hans, Ines Halloran, Stephen P Smith, Samuel G McGregor, Lesley M Vart, Gemma Howe, Rosemary Snowball, Julia Handley, Graham Logan, Richard F Rainbow, Sandra Smith, Steve Thomas, Mary C Counsell, Nicholas |
Contact Email: | l.m.mcgregor@stir.ac.uk |
Issue Date: | 20-Feb-2016 |
Date Deposited: | 12-Aug-2019 |
Citation: | Wardle J, von Wagner C, Kralj-Hans I, Halloran SP, Smith SG, McGregor LM, Vart G, Howe R, Snowball J, Handley G, Logan RF, Rainbow S, Smith S, Thomas MC & Counsell N (2016) Effects of evidence-based strategies to reduce the socioeconomic gradient of uptake in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (ASCEND): four cluster-randomised controlled trials. Commentary on: Marie-Louise Essink-Bot, Evelien Dekker Equal access to colorectal cancer screening The Lancet, Volume 387, Issue 10020, 20–26 February 2016, Pages 724-726. Lancet, 387 (10020), pp. 751-759. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736%2815%2901154-X |
Abstract: | Background: Uptake in the national colorectal cancer screening programme in England varies by socioeconomic status. We assessed four interventions aimed at reducing this gradient, with the intention of improving the health benefits of screening. Methods: All people eligible for screening (men and women aged 60–74 years) across England were included in four cluster-randomised trials. Randomisation was based on day of invitation. Each trial compared the standard information with the standard information plus the following supplementary interventions: trial 1 (November, 2012), a supplementary leaflet summarising the gist of the key information; trial 2 (March, 2012), a supplementary narrative leaflet describing people's stories; trial 3 (June, 2013), general practice endorsement of the programme on the invitation letter; and trial 4 (July–August, 2013) an enhanced reminder letter with a banner that reiterated the screening offer. Socioeconomic status was defined by the Index of Multiple Deprivation score for each home address. The primary outcome was the socioeconomic status gradient in uptake across deprivation quintiles. This study is registered, number ISRCTN74121020. Findings: As all four trials were embedded in the screening programme, loss to follow-up was minimal (less than 0·5%). Trials 1 (n=163 525) and 2 (n=150 417) showed no effects on the socioeconomic gradient of uptake or overall uptake. Trial 3 (n=265 434) showed no effect on the socioeconomic gradient but was associated with increased overall uptake (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·07, 95% CI 1·04–1·10, p |
DOI Link: | 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01154-X |
Rights: | This article is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). You may copy and distribute the article, create extracts, abstracts and new works from the article, alter and revise the article, text or data mine the article and otherwise reuse the article commercially (including reuse and/or resale of the article) without permission from Elsevier. You must give appropriate credit to the original work, together with a link to the formal publication through the relevant DOI and a link to the Creative Commons user license above. You must indicate if any changes are made but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use of the work. |
Notes: | Additional co-authors: Steve Morris, Stephen W Duffy, Allan Hackshaw, Sue Moss, Wendy Atkin, and Rosalind Raine |
Licence URL(s): | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Wardle et al-2016.pdf | Fulltext - Published Version | 480.93 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is protected by original copyright |
A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.