Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
BMC Cancer ; 21(1): 496, 2021 May 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33941114

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: More people are surviving a first primary cancer and experiencing a second, different cancer. However, little is known about the diagnostic journeys of patients with second primary cancer (SPC). This study explores the views of patients and general practitioners (GPs) on their experiences of pathways to diagnosis of SPC, including the influence of a previous diagnosis of cancer on symptom appraisal, help-seeking and referral decisions. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with patients with a SPC diagnosis and case-linked GP interviews in a Scottish primary care setting. In-depth face to face or telephone interviews were conducted, underpinned by a social constructionist approach. Interviews were transcribed and Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis undertaken. Three analysts from the research team read transcripts and developed the coding framework using QSR NVivo version 10, with input from a fourth researcher. Themes were developed from refined codes and interpreted in the context of existing literature and theory. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 23 patients (aged 43-84 years) with a SPC diagnosis, and 7 GPs. Five patient themes were identified: Awareness of SPC, symptom appraisal and help-seeking, pathways to diagnosis, navigating the healthcare system, and impact of SPC. GPs interviews identified: experience and knowledge of SPC and referrals and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Insights into the pathway to diagnosis of SPC highlights the need for increased awareness of and vigilance for SPC among patients and healthcare providers (HCPs), and emotional support to manage the psychosocial burden.


Subject(s)
General Practitioners/psychology , Neoplasms, Second Primary/diagnosis , Neoplasms, Second Primary/psychology , Symptom Assessment/psychology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Awareness , Clinical Decision-Making , Female , Health Behavior , Help-Seeking Behavior , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Primary Health Care , Psychological Distress , Qualitative Research , Referral and Consultation , Scotland
2.
BMJ Open ; 10(10): e042931, 2020 10 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33067305

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Excess free sugar intake is associated with obesity and poor dental health. Adolescents consume substantially more free sugar than is recommended. National (UK) School Food Standards (SFS) are in place but are not mandatory in all schools, and their impact on the diets of secondary school pupils is unknown. We aim to evaluate how SFS and wider healthy eating recommendations (from the national School Food Plan (SFP)) are implemented in secondary schools and how they influence pupils' diets and dental health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Secondary-level academies/free schools in the West Midlands, UK were divided into two groups: SFS mandated and SFS non-mandated. Using propensity scores to guide sampling, we aim to recruit 22 schools in each group. We will compare data on school food provision and sales, school food culture and environment, and the food curriculum from each group, collected through: school staff, governor, pupil, parent surveys; school documents; and observation. We will explore the implementation level for the SFS requirements and SFP recommendations and develop a school food typology. We aim to recruit 1980 pupils aged 11-15 years across the 44 schools and collect dietary intake (24-hour recall) and dental health data through self-completion surveys. We will compare free sugar/other dietary intake and dental health across the two SFS groups and across the identified school types. School type will be further characterised in 4-8 case study schools through school staff interviews and pupil focus groups. Evaluation of economic impact will be through a cost-consequence analysis and an exploratory cost-utility analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Birmingham Ethical Review Committee (ERN_18-1738). Findings will be disseminated to key national and local agencies, schools and the public through reports, presentations, the media and open access publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 68757496 (registered 17 October 2019).


Subject(s)
Food , Schools , Adolescent , Child , Diet , Diet, Healthy , Eating , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...