Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30118
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKerrison, Robert Sen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMcGregor, Lesley Men_UK
dc.contributor.authorCounsell, Nicholasen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMarshall, Sarahen_UK
dc.contributor.authorPrentice, Andrewen_UK
dc.contributor.authorIsitt, Johnen_UK
dc.contributor.authorRees, Colin Jen_UK
dc.contributor.authorvon Wagner, Christianen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-20T00:02:50Z-
dc.date.available2019-09-20T00:02:50Z-
dc.date.issued2018-11en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/30118-
dc.description.abstractBackground We previously initiated a randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of two self-referral reminders and a theory-based leaflet (sent 12 and 24 months after the initial invitation) to increase participation within the English Bowel Scope Screening program. Purpose This study reports the results following the second reminder. Methods Men and women included in the initial sample (n = 1,383) were re-assessed for eligibility 24 months after their invitation (12 months after the first reminder) and excluded if they had attended screening, moved away, or died. Eligible adults received the same treatment they were allocated 12 months previous, that is, no reminder (“control”), or a self-referral reminder with either the standard information booklet (“Reminder and Standard Information Booklet”) or theory-based leaflet designed using the Behavior Change Wheel (“Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet”). The primary outcome was the proportion screened within each group 12 weeks after the second reminder. Results In total, 1,218 (88.1%) individuals were eligible. Additional uptake following the second reminder was 0.4% (2/460), 4.8% (19/399), and 7.9% (29/366) in the control, Reminder and Standard Information Booklet, and Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet groups, respectively. When combined with the first reminder, the overall uptake for each group was 0.7% (3/461), 14.5% (67/461), and 21.5% (99/461). Overall uptake was significantly higher in the Reminder and Standard Information Booklet and Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet groups than in the control (odds ratio [OR] = 26.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.1–84.0, p < .001 and OR = 46.9, 95% CI = 14.7–149.9, p < .001, respectively), and significantly higher in the Reminder and Theory-Based Leaflet group than in the Reminder and Standard Information Booklet group (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.3–2.6, p < .001). Conclusion A second reminder increased uptake among former nonparticipants. The added value of the theory-based leaflet highlights a potential benefit to reviewing the current information booklet. Trials Registry Number ISRCTN44293755.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_UK
dc.relationKerrison RS, McGregor LM, Counsell N, Marshall S, Prentice A, Isitt J, Rees CJ & von Wagner C (2018) Use of Two Self-referral Reminders and a Theory-Based Leaflet to Increase the Uptake of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy in the English Bowel Scope Screening Program: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial in London. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 52 (11), pp. 941-951. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kax068en_UK
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Behavioral Medicine. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.subjectColorectal canceren_UK
dc.subjectScreeningen_UK
dc.subjectUptakeen_UK
dc.subjectFlexible sigmoidoscopyen_UK
dc.subjectBehavioral scienceen_UK
dc.titleUse of Two Self-referral Reminders and a Theory-Based Leaflet to Increase the Uptake of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy in the English Bowel Scope Screening Program: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial in Londonen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/abm/kax068en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid30346495en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleAnnals of Behavioral Medicineen_UK
dc.citation.issn1532-4796en_UK
dc.citation.issn0883-6612en_UK
dc.citation.volume52en_UK
dc.citation.issue11en_UK
dc.citation.spage941en_UK
dc.citation.epage951en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderCancer Research UKen_UK
dc.citation.date15/01/2018en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationSt Mark's Hospital and Academic Instituteen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationSt Mark's Hospital and Academic Instituteen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPartners in Creationen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationSouth Tyneside NHS Foundation Trusten_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85055073295en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1399353en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-7093-1391en_UK
dc.date.accepted2018-01-15en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-01-15en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2019-09-17en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorKerrison, Robert S|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMcGregor, Lesley M|0000-0002-7093-1391en_UK
local.rioxx.authorCounsell, Nicholas|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMarshall, Sarah|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorPrentice, Andrew|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorIsitt, John|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorRees, Colin J|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorvon Wagner, Christian|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|Cancer Research UK|http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000289en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2019-09-19en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2019-09-19|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenamekax068.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1532-4796en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
kax068.pdfFulltext - Published Version651.82 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

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.