Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30226
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorvon Wagner, Christianen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBonello, Bernardetteen_UK
dc.contributor.authorStoffel, Sandro Ten_UK
dc.contributor.authorSkrobanski, Hannaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorKerrison, Roberten_UK
dc.contributor.authorMcGregor, Lesley Men_UK
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-03T00:01:25Z-
dc.date.available2019-10-03T00:01:25Z-
dc.date.issued2019-12en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/30226-
dc.description.abstractObjective: This prospective study aimed to identify predictors of intention and subsequent attendance of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening using constructs derived from the Health Belief Model (HBM). Method: A total of 4,330 people aged 54 years and registered at 1 of 83 participating English general practices were sent a preinvitation questionnaire to assess sociodemographics, HBM variables including perceived benefits, barriers, seriousness, health motivation, and external cues to action as well a range of other constructs and personal characteristics known to relate to cancer screening. Results: Of the 1,578 respondents (36.4%), 1,555 (98.5%) answered the intention question: 52.9% stated definitely yes, 38.1% probably yes, 6.8% probably not, and 2.2% definitely not. Intentions were positively associated with a higher score on a scale of benefits (odds ratio [OR] = 4.62; 95% confidence intervals [CI; 3.24, 6.59]) and health motivation, that is, interest in other ways of preventing colorectal cancer (OR = 2.61; 95% CI [1.62, 4.22]), while a higher score on perceived barriers (OR = 0.19; 95% CI [0.12, 0.31]) and currently following recommended healthy lifestyle behaviors (OR = 0.31; 95% CI [0.16, 0.59]) were negatively associated. Attendance was verified for 922 intenders (65.2%) of whom 737 (79.9%) attended. Attendance was predicted by health motivation (OR = 1.75; 95% CI [1.07, 2.86]), perceived benefits (OR = 1.82; 95% CI [1.37, 2.43]), perceived barriers (OR = 0.47; 95% CI [0.32, 0.69]), individual-level deprivation (OR = 0.26; 95% CI [0.14, 0.50]), and having diabetes (OR = 0.48; 95% CI [0.25, 0.94]). Conclusion: This study supported the usefulness of the HBM in predicting cancer screening and was further enhanced by adding non-HBM variables such as individual socioeconomic deprivation and comorbidities.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherAmerican Psychological Association (APA)en_UK
dc.relationvon Wagner C, Bonello B, Stoffel ST, Skrobanski H, Kerrison R & McGregor LM (2019) Predictors of intention translation in flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. Health Psychology, 38 (12), pp. 1083-1095. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000793en_UK
dc.rights©American Psychological Association, 2019. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000793en_UK
dc.subjectcancer screeningen_UK
dc.subjectflexible sigmoidoscopyen_UK
dc.subjectprospective questionnaireen_UK
dc.subjectintentionsen_UK
dc.subjectattendanceen_UK
dc.subjectHealth Belief Modelen_UK
dc.titlePredictors of intention translation in flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal canceren_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1037/hea0000793en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid31556658en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleHealth Psychologyen_UK
dc.citation.issn1930-7810en_UK
dc.citation.issn0278-6133en_UK
dc.citation.volume38en_UK
dc.citation.issue12en_UK
dc.citation.spage1083en_UK
dc.citation.epage1095en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusAM - Accepted Manuscripten_UK
dc.contributor.funderCancer Research United Kingdomen_UK
dc.citation.date26/09/2019en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000497755800005en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85075102509en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1457980en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-7093-1391en_UK
dc.date.accepted2019-06-27en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-06-27en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2019-10-02en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionAMen_UK
local.rioxx.authorvon Wagner, Christian|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBonello, Bernardette|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorStoffel, Sandro T|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorSkrobanski, Hanna|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorKerrison, Robert|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMcGregor, Lesley M|0000-0002-7093-1391en_UK
local.rioxx.projectC27064/A17326|Cancer Research United Kingdom|en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2019-10-02en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved|2019-10-02|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenameHP_manuscript_revisions_Version 3_changes accepted_aug.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source0278-6133en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
HP_manuscript_revisions_Version 3_changes accepted_aug.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version876.2 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



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.