{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,10]],"date-time":"2026-10-10T01:00:54Z","timestamp":1791594054662,"version":"4.3.4"},"reference-count":11,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2013,6,1]],"date-time":"2013-06-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1370044800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["J Med Screen"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To measure whether uptake of breast cancer screening was affected by the publication of the Marmot Review and associated press coverage.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Setting<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Eight NHS breast screening centres in the West Midlands of the UK.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Uptake of breast cancer screening invitations was compared in the week before and after the Marmot review publication. All 12,023 women invited for screening between 23 October 2012 and 5 November 2012 were included. A mixed effects model of the predictors of screening uptake (on date invited, or within 21 days) was created. Predictors considered for inclusion were whether the allocated screening appointment was before or after publication of the review, population factors (age, index of multiple deprivation income domain by quintile, previous attendance), and interaction terms.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Uptake decreased after publication of the review from 65% to 62% (OR = 0.87 95%CI = 0.80\u20130.94), but a similar decrease was seen for the same dates on the previous year (OR = 0.85 95%CI = 0.78\u20130.93). Odds of attending screening were lower for women in the most deprived (uptake = 49%, OR = 0.54, 95%CI = 0.46\u20130.62) in comparison with the least deprived quintile (uptake = 71%). Odds of attendance also increased if the woman had ever previously attended (OR 3.9 95% CI 3.5\u20134.4), and decreased with each year of increasing age (OR 0.96 95% CI 0.96\u20130.97). There were no interactions between any of the other predictors and whether the appointment was before or after publication of the Marmot review.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>No change in uptake of breast cancer screening above normal seasonal variation was detected after publication of the Marmot review.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1177\/0969141313497198","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,20]],"date-time":"2013-07-20T00:37:33Z","timestamp":1374280653000},"page":"86-90","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":10,"title":["The effects of a UK review of Breast Cancer Screening on Uptake: An observational before\/after study"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"20","author":[{"given":"Sian","family":"Taylor-Phillips","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"NIHR postdoctoral research fellow, Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Emma","family":"O'Sullivan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Breast Screening Deputy QA Coordinator, NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, B15 2TT"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Olive","family":"Kearins","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Regional Director of Breast Screening Quality Assurance, NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, B15 2TT"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Helen","family":"Parsons","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Fellow in Medical Statistics, Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Aileen","family":"Clarke","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Professor of Public Health and Health Services Research, Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,19]]},"reference":[{"key":"MSC497198C1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(12)61611-0"},{"key":"MSC497198C2","unstructured":"BoseleyS. Breast screening, the verdict: it saves lives, but may also harm. The Guardian. Tuesday 30th October 2012"},{"key":"MSC497198C3","unstructured":"HopeJ. Needless cancer therapy for 4000 women. The Daily Mail. Tuesday 30th October 2012"},{"key":"MSC497198C4","unstructured":"AdamsS. Breast screening \u2018harming thousands\u2019. The Daily Telegraph. Tuesday 30th October 2012"},{"key":"MSC497198C5","unstructured":"BarrowM. Keep having scans despite the downsides, women told. The Times. Tuesday 30th October 2012"},{"key":"MSC497198C6","unstructured":"LauranceJ. Benefits of breast cancer screening \u2018just outweigh the risks\u2019. The Independent. Tuesday 30th October 2012"},{"key":"MSC497198C7","unstructured":"NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, http:\/\/www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk\/breastscreen\/news\/041.html (accessed 5th December 2012)"},{"key":"MSC497198C8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/pubmed\/fdq052"},{"key":"MSC497198C9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.vaccine.2007.08.043"},{"key":"MSC497198C10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.39489.590671.25"},{"key":"MSC497198C11","unstructured":"RasbashJ, CharltonC, BrowneW.J, HealyM, CameronB. MLwiN Version 2.26. Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol. 2005"}],"container-title":["Journal of Medical Screening"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/0969141313497198","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1177\/0969141313497198","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/0969141313497198","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,1]],"date-time":"2026-05-01T23:23:00Z","timestamp":1777677780000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/0969141313497198"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2013,6]]},"references-count":11,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,6]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1177\/0969141313497198"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0969141313497198","relation":{},"ISSN":["0969-1413","1475-5793"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0969-1413","type":"print"},{"value":"1475-5793","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2013,6]]}}}