Factors influencing the participation of groups identified as underserved in cervical cancer screening in Europe: a scoping review of the literature

Background

Cervical cancer is a preventable and inequitably distributed disease. Screening plays a vital role in prevention, but many women face barriers to participation. The aims of this scoping review, undertaken to inform the co-design of interventions to equitably increase screening uptake, were to: (1) identify barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening for underserved populations, and (2) identify and describe the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving participation in cervical cancer screening among underserved groups in Europe.

Methods

Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies focusing on barriers and facilitators to cervical screening participation and interventions to improve uptake undertaken in Europe and published after 2000 were included. Four electronic databases were searched to identify relevant papers. Titles and abstracts were screened, full text reviewed, and key findings extracted. Data were extracted and analyzed according to different health system strata: system-wide (macro), service specific (meso) and individual/community specific (micro). Within these categories, themes were identified, and the population groups impacted were recorded. All findings are presented in accordance with (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

33 studies on barriers and facilitators and eight intervention studies met the inclusion criteria. Collectively, the findings of these studies presented a wide array of screening uptake barriers, facilitators, and interventions, predominantly related to screening service and individual/community factors. However, although diverse, certain core themes around information provision, prompts for participation and the need for inclusive spaces were apparent. Implementation of screening programs should focus on: (1) reducing identifiable barriers, (2) increasing public awareness, and (3) providing patient reminders and measures to promote engagement by healthcare providers.

Conclusion

There are many barriers to uptake of cervical cancer screening and this review, nested within a larger study, will inform work to devise a solution alongside groups identified in three European countries.

The Politics of LGBT+ Health Inequality: Conclusions from a UK Scoping Review

This scoping review of UK evidence aimed to describe what is known about Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Trans (LGBT+) health inequalities in relation to cancer, mental health, and palliative care to inform research, policy and public health interventions. Using a scoping review methodology, we identified studies from database searches, citation tracking, and expert consultation. The in/exclusion criteria was based on the PICOS framework. The data were charted and then summarised to map the theoretical approaches and the main types of evidence and identify knowledge gaps. In total, 279 articles were screened and 83 were included in the final review. We found that there is limited UK research examining LGBT+ health inequality in cancer, mental health and palliative care. We would argue that this thin evidence base is partly due to national policy discussions of LGBT+ health inequality that are framed within a depoliticised ‘it’s getting better’ narrative, and an unwillingness to adequately acknowledge the unjust social and economic relations that produce LGBT+ health inequality. In addition, LGBT+ health inequality is depoliticised by existing public health explanatory theories, models and frameworks that exclude sexual orientation and gender diversity as dimensions of power that interlock with those of socio-economic, race and ethnicity. This is a barrier to developing public health interventions that can successfully tackle LGBT+ health inequality

“What do you mean when you say that you are sexually satisfied?” A mixed methods study

Not enough is understood about the role of gender norms and sexual stigma in shaping individuals’ definitions of sexual satisfaction. The current study aimed to investigate the heterogeneity of definitions of sexual satisfaction in a sample of young adults, ages 18–28 (M = 22.6; SD = 4.78). Forty US participants (50% females; 45% LGBTQ; 53% white) sorted 63 statements about sexual satisfaction using a Q methodology design ( Watts and Stenner, 2005 ), followed by semi-structured interviews. This mixed methods procedure enabled both a systematic and in-depth examination of the dimensions participants prioritized when determining their sexual satisfaction. Analysis of participants’ Q sorts indicated four distinct perspectives on sexual satisfaction: emotional and masculine; relational and feminine; partner focused; and orgasm focused. These four factors were further explored using participants’ interview data. Findings indicated that individuals interpreted sexual satisfaction using several key dimensions not regularly included in survey research. Existing survey items do not regularly attend to the gendered and heteronormative components of sexual satisfaction appraisals and as a result, important interpretive patterns may be overlooked.