An overview of factors influencing cancer screening uptake in primary healthcare institutions
Open accessAbstract
analysis, D -Data Interpretation, E -Manuscript Preparation, F -Literature search, G -Funds Collection screening significantly decreases the severity and incidence of conditions, as well as mortality, and therefore can improve the health of the population.screening in Poland falls below the acceptable level of 45% of organised screening uptake and the recommended level of 65%.Multidimensional factors have been implicated as barriers and facilitators of screening uptake in the primary care setting.this paper summarises the existing evidence on factors influencing screening uptake in a Pap smear for cervical cancer (CC), mammography screening for breast cancer and faecal occult blood test (FOBt) for colorectal cancer (CRC).we performed a literature search in the MeDLIne (PubMed) and eMBase databases and included articles of any study design published between 2010 and 2020.we also demonstrate the original concept of 'ugly Value', which describes factors that may reduce screening uptake.Primary care practitioners play a vital role in increasing screening rates in the populations and can improve these rates through a variety of systematically implemented strategies and interventions.we determine four areas to improve cancer screening uptake in primary healthcare institutions: data gathering and data use (It systems, meaningful use of electronic health Records to generate reminders, prompting healthcare professionals to refer patients for screening), cost effectiveness (avoiding overuse of screening in low-risk populations), innovative efficient management (use of effective interventions and thoughtful allocation of resources, e.g.engaging nurses into patient navigation instead of assigning them to answer patient concerns about screening by telephone), organisational system (team based, integrated care and patient navigation are ways to improve screening rates).
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The positive association between physician recommendations and cancer screening attendance is especially strong when the recommendation involves enthusiasm and encouragement, and the physician understands the patient's perspective, addresses their needs, and involves them in decision-making.
“The positive association between physician recommendations and cancer screening attendance is especially strong when the recommendation involves enthusiasm and encouragement, and the physician understands the patients' perspective, addresses their needs, and involves them in the decision-making process [35].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Primary care providers' or general practitioners' endorsement, encouragement and recommendations to attend cancer screening are often key.
“Primary care providers' or general practitioners' (GP) endorsement, encouragement and recommendations to attend cancer screening are often key [e.g., 15,28,35], and might be particularly important for subpopulations, e.g., immigrants [7].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Reminders have been effective, but more for previously compliant attenders than for non-attenders.
“Reminders have also been effective [42], but more for previously compliant attenders than for non-attenders [35].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Strategies such as electronic medical records, prompts to remind patients, and a systematic process to generate lists of patients due for screening can increase screenings.
“Strategies such as electronic medical records, prompts to remind patients, a systematic process to generate lists of patients due for screening, can increase screenings [35].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Service quality can be improved, e.g., by increasing collaboration between team members.
“Service quality can also be improved, e.g., by increasing collaboration between team members [35].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Provider burnout is associated with decreased quality of care.
“Higher provider-to-patient ratio is associated with higher a screening rate and lower provider burnout which in turn is associated with decreased quality of care [35].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Higher provider-to-patient ratio is associated with higher screening rate and lower provider burnout.
“Higher provider-to-patient ratio is associated with higher a screening rate and lower provider burnout which in turn is associated with decreased quality of care [35].”
From Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening
Everett, T., Bryant, A., Griffin, M. F., Martin-Hirsch, P. P., Forbes, C. A., & Jepson, R. G. (2011) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002834.pub2 · Cited by 332 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 39
- sarma ea, silver MI, kobrin sC, et al. Cancer screening: health impact, prevalence, correlates, and interventions. Psychol Health 2019; 34(9): 1036-1072.
- Jansen eeL, Zielonke n, Gini a, et al. effect of organised cervical cancer screening on cervical cancer mortality in europe: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer 2020; 127: 207-223.
- Gini a, Jansen eeL, Zielonke n, et al. Impact of colorectal cancer screening on cancer-specific mortality in europe: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer 2020; 127: 224-235.
- Zielonke n, Gini a, Jansen eeL, et al. evidence for reducing cancer-specific mortality due to screening for breast cancer in europe: a sys- tematic review. Eur J Cancer 2020; 127: 191-206.
- emery JD, shaw k, williams B, et al. the role of primary care in early detection and follow-up of cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2014; 11(1): 38-48.
- Baxter nn, sutradhar R, Li Q, et al. Do Primary Care Provider strategies Improve Patient Participation in Colorectal Cancer screening. Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112(4): 622-632.
- Beaber eF, tosteson ana, haas Js, et al. Breast cancer screening initiation after turning 40 years of age within the PROsPR consortium. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016; 156(1): 109-116.
- Brenner at, Dougherty M, Reuland Ds. Colorectal Cancer screening in average Risk Patients. Med Clin North Am 2017; 101(4): 755-767.
- Buist DsM, Gao h, anderson ML, et al. Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: mammogram-specific reminders vs. compre- hensive preventive services birthday letters. Prev Med 2017; 102: 49-58.
- Carney tJ, Morgan GP, Jones J, et al. hypothesis generation using network structures on community health center cancer-screening performance. J Biomed Inform 2015; 57: 288-307.
- Chuang e, Pourat n, Chen X, et al. Organizational Factors associated with Disparities in Cervical and Colorectal Cancer screening Rates in Community health Centers. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2019; 30(1): 161-181.
- Clouston k, katz a, Martens PJ, et al. Does access to a colorectal cancer screening website and/or a nurse-managed telephone help line provided to patients by their family physician increase fecal occult blood test uptake? Results from a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 2014; 14(1): 263.
- Deding u, henig as, torp-Pedersen C, et al. the effects of reminders for colorectal cancer screening: participation and inequality. Int J Colorectal Dis 2019; 34(1): 141-150.
- Gimeno Garcia aZ, hernandez alvarez Buylla n, nicolas-Perez D, et al. Public awareness of colorectal cancer screening: knowledge, attitudes, and interventions for increasing screening uptake. ISRN Oncol 2014; 2014: 425787.
- Giordano L, stefanini V, senore C, et al. the impact of different communication and organizational strategies on mammography screen- ing uptake in women aged 40-45 years. Eur J Public Health 2012; 22(3): 413-418.
- Goldzweig CL, Parkerton Ph, washington DL, et al. Primary care practice and facility quality orientation: influence on breast and cervi- cal cancer screening rates. Am J Manag Care 2004; 10(4): 265-272.
- Ingrand I, Defossez G, Richer J-P, et al. Colonoscopy uptake for high-risk individuals with a family history of colorectal neoplasia: a mul- ticenter, randomized trial of tailored counseling versus standard information. Medicine 2016; 95(33): e4303-e.
- kitchener hC, Gittins M, Rivero-arias O, et al. a cluster randomised trial of strategies to increase cervical screening uptake at first invita- tion (stRateGIC). Health Technol Assess 2016; 20(68): 1-138.
- krok-schoen JL, Oliveri JM, Paskett eD. Cancer care delivery and women's health: the role of patient navigation. Front Oncol 2016; 6: 2.
- Lin sC, Mckinley D, sripipatana a, et al. Colorectal cancer screening at us community health centers: examination of sociodemographic disparities and association with patient-provider communication. Cancer 2017; 123(21): 4185-4192.
- MacLaughlin kL, swanson kM, naessens JM, et al. Cervical cancer screening: a prospective cohort study of the effects of historical patient compliance and a population-based informatics prompted reminder on screening rates. J Eval Clin Pract 2014; 20(2): 136-143.
- Molina Y, kim sJ, Berrios n, et al. Patient navigation Improves subsequent Breast Cancer screening after a noncancerous Result: evi- dence from the Patient navigation in Medically underserved areas study. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2018; 27(3): 317-323.
- Offman J, wilson M, Lamont M, et al. a randomised trial of weekend and evening breast screening appointments. Br J Cancer 2013; 109(3): 597-602.
- Percac-Lima s, López L, ashburner JM, et al. the longitudinal impact of patient navigation on equity in colorectal cancer screening in a large primary care network. Cancer 2014; 120(13): 2025-2031.
- Peterson eB, Ostroff Js, Duhamel kn, et al. Impact of provider-patient communication on cancer screening adherence: a systematic review. Prev Med 2016; 93: 96-105.
- Raine R, Duffy sw, wardle J, et al. Impact of general practice endorsement on the social gradient in uptake in bowel cancer screening. Br J Cancer 2016; 114(3): 321-326.
- Robinson-white s, Conroy B, slavish kh, et al. Patient navigation in breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Nurs 2010; 33(2): 127-140.
- sabatino sa, Lawrence B, elder R, et al. effectiveness of interventions to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers: nine updated systematic reviews for the guide to community preventive services. Am J Prev Med 2012; 43(1): 97-118.
- stone eG, Morton sC, hulscher Me, et al. Interventions that increase use of adult immunization and cancer screening services: a meta- analysis. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136(9): 641-651.
- underhill ML, kiviniemi Mt. the association of perceived provider-patient communication and relationship quality with colorectal cancer screening. Health Educ Behav 2012; 39(5): 555-563.
- abadi MMM, Vakilian k, safari V. Motivational interview on having Pap test among middle-aged women -a counseling service in pri- mary care. Fam Med Prim Care Rev 2018; 20(2): 101-105.
- helfrich CD, simonetti Ja, Clinton wL, et al. the association of team-specific workload and staffing with odds of burnout among Va primary care team members. J Gen Intern Med 2017; 32(7): 760-766.
- wells kJ, Battaglia ta, Dudley DJ, et al. Patient navigation: state of the art or is it science? Cancer 2008; 113(8): 1999-2010.
- Paskett eD, harrop JP, wells kJ. Patient navigation: an update on the state of the science. CA Cancer J Clin 2011; 61(4): 237-249.
- Vries eF de, struijs Jn, heijink R, et al. are low-value care measures up to the task? a systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Serv Res 2016; 16(1): 405.
- Isaac t, Rosenthal MB, Colla Ch, et al. Measuring overuse with electronic health records data. Am J Manag Care 2018; 24(1): 19-25.
- kruzikas D, smith Js, harley C, et al. Costs associated with Management of Cervical human Papillomavirus-Related Conditions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2012; 21(9): 1469-1478.
- Verkerk ew, tanke MaC, kool RB, et al. Limit, lean or listen? a typology of low-value care that gives direction in de-implementation. Int J Qual Health Care 2018; 30(9): 736-739.
- Luxford k, safran DG, Delbanco t. Promoting patient-centered care: a qualitative study of facilitators and barriers in healthcare organi- zations with a reputation for improving the patient experience. Int J Qual Health Care 2011; 23(5): 510-515. tables: 2 Figures: 0 References: 52 Received: 08.02.2021 Reviewed: 23.06.2021 accepted: 22.10.2021 address for correspondence: Joanna Oberska Zakład Medycyny społecznej i Zdrowia Publicznego warszawski uniwersytet Medyczny ul. Oczki 3 02-007 warszawa Polska tel.: +48 506 376 998
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Improving cancer screening uptake: A behavioural and cultural insights perspective and rapid review
Palsola, M., Likki, T., Snijders, V., Corbex, M., Lasierra, L., & Curtis, B. (2026) · Glasnik javnog zdravlja · doi:10.5937/serbjph2601086p
- Authors
- Prusaczyk, A., Żuk, P., Guzek, M., Bogdan, M., Nitsch-Osuch, A., Oberska, J., & Karczmarz, S.
- Affiliations
- Medical University of Warsaw (PL)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Family Medicine & Primary Care Review
- Publisher
- Termedia Sp. z.o.o.
- Published
- 2022
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71-77
- ISSN
- 1734-3402 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4226118409
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 0.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- Family Medicine & Primary Care Review (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
- Keywords
- cancer screening uptake, primary care, cervical cancer screening, breast cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, barriers and facilitators, electronic health records, screening reminders, patient navigation, integrated care, cost-effectiveness of screening, Poland
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
