Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
J Med Screen ; 14(1): 29-33, 2007.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17362569

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore women's attitudes towards the information about human papilloma virus (HPV) provided during cervical screening and to describe women's HPV information needs. SETTING: Women with a range of screening results (normal, inadequate, borderline and abnormal) were identified by three screening centres in England. Two consecutive samples of women attending for colposcopy for the first time following screening were also approached. METHODS: Seven focus groups were conducted between May 2005 and April 2006 with 38 women who had recently been for cervical screening or had attended a colposcopy appointment. RESULTS: Most women had no prior awareness of HPV. Many women queried the importance of being informed about HPV as no preventive advice or treatment is available. The HPV information included in the UK national screening programme abnormal result leaflet left women with more questions than answers (a list of unanswered questions is included with the results). Further information was requested about HPV detection, infection and transmission as well as the natural history and progression of cervical cancer. No consensus was reached regarding the best time to provide HPV information. CONCLUSIONS: Clear communication of the complicated issues surrounding HPV infection and the natural history of cervical cancer is a considerable educational challenge for screening providers. As awareness of HPV becomes more widespread and HPV testing is explored as a triage during cervical screening, women are likely to require more information about the virus and the implications of infection. Consideration should be given to the production of a separate national screening programme HPV leaflet.


Subject(s)
Health Services Needs and Demand , Information Dissemination , Mass Screening , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , Awareness , Comprehension , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Middle Aged , Papillomaviridae , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/psychology , Patient Education as Topic , Sexual Partners , Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Viral/psychology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/psychology , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/psychology
2.
J Epidemiol Community Health ; 61(3): 262-70, 2007 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17325406

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews have, in the past, focused on quantitative studies and clinical effectiveness, while excluding qualitative evidence. Qualitative research can inform evidence-based practice independently of other research methodologies but methods for the synthesis of such data are currently evolving. Synthesising quantitative and qualitative research in a single review is an important methodological challenge. AIMS: This paper describes the review methods developed and the difficulties encountered during the process of updating a systematic review of evidence to inform guidelines for the content of patient information related to cervical screening. METHODS: Systematic searches of 12 electronic databases (January 1996 to July 2004) were conducted. Studies that evaluated the content of information provided to women about cervical screening or that addressed women's information needs were assessed for inclusion. A data extraction form and quality assessment criteria were developed from published resources. A non-quantitative synthesis was conducted and a tabular evidence profile for each important outcome (eg "explain what the test involves") was prepared. The overall quality of evidence for each outcome was then assessed using an approach published by the GRADE working group, which was adapted to suit the review questions and modified to include qualitative research evidence. Quantitative and qualitative studies were considered separately for every outcome. RESULTS: 32 papers were included in the systematic review following data extraction and assessment of methodological quality. The review questions were best answered by evidence from a range of data sources. The inclusion of qualitative research, which was often highly relevant and specific to many components of the screening information materials, enabled the production of a set of recommendations that will directly affect policy within the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. CONCLUSIONS: A practical example is provided of how quantitative and qualitative data sources might successfully be brought together and considered in one review.


Subject(s)
Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Qualitative Research , Review Literature as Topic , Adult , Colposcopy , Female , Humans , Mass Screening , Middle Aged , Pamphlets , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Research Design , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...