Stakeholder perceptions of cervical screening accessibility and attendance in Ireland: a qualitative study
- PMID: 38943526
- PMCID: PMC11214098
- DOI: 10.1093/heapro/daae072
Stakeholder perceptions of cervical screening accessibility and attendance in Ireland: a qualitative study
Abstract
Organized cervical screening programmes are commonplace in high-income countries. To provide an equitable cervical screening service, it is important to understand who is and is not attending screening and why. Promotion of screening and service improvement is not possible without recognition and identification of the barriers and needs of communities that are less engaged with screening. This study explored stakeholder perceptions of cervical screening attendance and accessibility in Ireland. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 healthcare professionals, policymakers and academics. Interviews were conducted online in 2022. Reflexive thematic analysis was used inductively to generate themes, supported by NVivo. Three themes were developed: (i) getting the right information out the right way, (ii) acceptability and accessibility of screening and (iii) trying to identify and reach the non-attenders. Participants felt public knowledge of cervical screening and human papilloma virus was low and communication strategies were not adequate. Individual, cultural, structural and service-level factors influenced the accessibility and acceptability of screening. Identifying and reaching non-attenders was considered challenging and community outreach could support those less likely to attend screening. Stakeholder perspectives were valuable in understanding the complexities of screening accessibility and attendance from individual to service-level factors. Cultural competency training, inclusive language and visual cues in waiting rooms would support engagement with some populations who may be hesitant to attend screening. Collaboration with community organizations has opportunities to promote screening and understand the needs of those less likely to attend screening.
Keywords: Ireland; cancer; cervical cancer screening; engagement; participation; qualitative methods; screening; social determinants of health.
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this article.
Similar articles
-
Understanding the Influences of Cervical Screening Attendance among Women of Low Socioeconomic Position Using the Integrated Screening Action Model: A Qualitative Study.Semin Oncol Nurs. 2025 Jun;41(3):151891. doi: 10.1016/j.soncn.2025.151891. Epub 2025 May 8. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2025. PMID: 40340114
-
Experiences of a group of indigenous women from the Colombian Amazon with cervical cancer prevention screening. Qualitative study in the context of participatory research to reduce inequalities.Ethn Health. 2024 Nov;29(8):893-907. doi: 10.1080/13557858.2024.2387112. Epub 2024 Aug 6. Ethn Health. 2024. PMID: 39107054
-
'I Don't Think There Is a One-Size-Fits-All': A Qualitative Study Exploring Healthcare Professional and Service Provider Perspectives of Using Innovative Models of Cervical Screening to Improve Equitable Access to Self-Collection.Cancer Med. 2025 Jun;14(11):e70981. doi: 10.1002/cam4.70981. Cancer Med. 2025. PMID: 40415229 Free PMC article.
-
Barriers to cervical cancer screening in Africa: a systematic review.BMC Public Health. 2024 Feb 20;24(1):525. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-17842-1. BMC Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38378542 Free PMC article.
-
Barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening in high incidence populations: A synthesis of qualitative evidence.Women Health. 2016;56(4):448-67. doi: 10.1080/03630242.2015.1101742. Epub 2015 Oct 23. Women Health. 2016. PMID: 26496628 Review.
References
-
- Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2022) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage, Los Angeles, CA.
-
- Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977) Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32, 513–531.
-
- Central Statistics Office. (2020) Health determinants. https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-ihsmr/irishhealthsurv... (11 February 2024, date last accessed).