↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to cervical screening and interest in self-sampling among women who actively decline screening

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Screening, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#18 of 666)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
33 X users

Readers on

mendeley
232 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Barriers to cervical screening and interest in self-sampling among women who actively decline screening
Published in
Journal of Medical Screening, April 2018
DOI 10.1177/0969141318767471
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Objectives Understanding why some women actively decline cervical screening could contribute to tailored intervention development. We explored reasons for non-participation in cervical screening among women who had made an active decision not to attend in the future. We also explored interest in human papillomavirus self-sampling. Methods In a population-based survey of women in Great Britain, home-based computer-assisted interviews were carried out with screening eligible women. Women reported their intention to attend for screening when next invited. They endorsed predefined barriers to screening and indicated their interest in human papillomavirus self-sampling. Results Women who had actively declined screening and those who intended to go but were currently overdue (n=543) were included in this analysis. Women who had made an active decision not to be screened in the future were more likely to endorse the barriers 'I have other more important things to worry about' and to perceive screening to be of low relevance based on their sexual behaviour. Most participants (70%) indicated that they would be interested in human papillomavirus self-sampling. Interest in self-sampling was greater among those who reported having had a bad experience of screening in the past, were too busy or embarrassed to attend, or would not want a man to carry out the test. Conclusions Women who had made an active decision not to attend screening felt it was of low relevance to them and that they had more important things to worry about. Shifting the perceived cost-benefit ratio for these women by offering human papillomavirus self-sampling might increase screening participation in this group.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 232 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 232 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 41 18%
Student > Master 29 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 7%
Student > Postgraduate 9 4%
Researcher 8 3%
Other 22 9%
Unknown 107 46%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 6%
Psychology 8 3%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Other 20 9%
Unknown 117 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 68. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2026.
All research outputs
#791,424
of 34,327,810 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Screening
#18
of 666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,609
of 371,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Screening
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,327,810 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 371,685 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them