IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v82y2013icp108-114.html

Determinants of breast cancer screening uptake in women, evidence from the British Household Panel Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Carney, Patricia
  • O'Neill, Stephen
  • O'Neill, Ciaran

Abstract

Breast cancer screening is an integral part of the cancer control strategies of many developed economies. In Britain individuals screened in a given year are re-called every three years unless results indicate a need for more immediate investigation. This pattern may create a legacy arising from past decisions, a legacy that should be considered when examining current decisions. In this paper we use a balanced panel drawn from the British Household Panel Survey of 1997 women over an 18 year period to examine variations in uptake. A dynamic random effects probit model is used to control for unobserved heterogeneity and the legacy of previous decisions. As might be expected women to whom universal screening is offered are more likely to screen than others. Changes during the study period in the eligible age range saw an increase in uptake among the age group to whom the programme was extended but not among other groups. Past screening behaviour was found to be a significant predictor of current behaviour. Failure to account for past choices may result in model mis-specification and a failure to develop policies aimed at promoting initial engagement that may compromise the screening programme. Income was not found to be a significant determinant of uptake.

Suggested Citation

  • Carney, Patricia & O'Neill, Stephen & O'Neill, Ciaran, 2013. "Determinants of breast cancer screening uptake in women, evidence from the British Household Panel Survey," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 108-114.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:82:y:2013:i:c:p:108-114
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.12.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953612008416
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.12.018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2005. "Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 39-54, January.
    2. Ricardo Sabates & Leon Feinstein, 2008. "Do income effects mask social and behavioural factors when looking at universal health care provision?," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 53(1), pages 23-30, January.
    3. Scott, Anthony, 2000. "Economics of general practice," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 22, pages 1175-1200, Elsevier.
    4. Mundlak, Yair, 1978. "On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 69-85, January.
    5. Walsh, Brendan & Silles, Mary & O'Neill, Ciarán, 2011. "The importance of socio-economic variables in cancer screening participation: A comparison between population-based and opportunistic screening in the EU-15," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 269-276, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexander Labeit & Frank Peinemann, 2015. "Breast and cervical cancer screening in Great Britain: Dynamic interrelated processes," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Anezaki, Hisataka & Hashimoto, Hideki, 2018. "Time cost of child rearing and its effect on women's uptake of free health checkups in Japan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1-7.
    3. Gil Lacruz, Ana Isabel & Gil Lacruz, Marta & Gorgemans, Sophie, 2014. "Female preventive practices: Breast and smear tests," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 135-144.
    4. Hobbins, Anna P. & Barry, Luke & Kelleher, Dan & Shah, Koonal & Devlin, Nancy & Ramos Goni, Juan Manuel & O’Neill, Ciaran, 2020. "Do people with private health insurance attach a higher value to health than those without insurance? Results from an EQ-5D-5 L valuation study in Ireland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(6), pages 639-646.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kerstin Bruckmeier & Katrin Hohmeyer & Stefan Schwarz, 2018. "Welfare receipt misreporting in survey data and its consequences for state dependence estimates: new insights from linked administrative and survey data," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 52(1), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Wang, Hui & Riedinger, Jeffrey & Jin, Songqing, 2015. "Land documents, tenure security and land rental development: Panel evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 220-235.
    3. Tesfaye, Wondimagegn & Tirivayi, Nyasha, 2020. "Crop diversity, household welfare and consumption smoothing under risk: Evidence from rural Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    4. Lionel WILNER, 2019. "The Dynamics of Individual Happiness," Working Papers 2019-18, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    5. Akay, Alpaslan, 2009. "Dynamics of the Employment Assimilation of First-Generation Immigrant Men in Sweden: Comparing Dynamic and Static Assimilation Models with Longitudinal Data," IZA Discussion Papers 4655, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Erika Raquel Badillo & Rosina Moreno, 2016. "Are Collaborative Agreements in Innovation Activities Persistent at the Firm Level? Empirical Evidence for the Spanish Case," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 49(1), pages 71-101, August.
    7. Dawid, Herbert & Pellegrino, Gabriele & Vivarelli, Marco, 2017. "Is the demand-pull driver equally crucial for product vs process innovation?," MERIT Working Papers 2017-035, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    8. Anand, Paul & Gray, Alastair & Liberini, Federica & Roope, Laurence & Smith, Ron & Thomas, Ranjeeta, 2015. "Wellbeing over 50," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 68-78.
    9. Hernández-Quevedo, Cristina & Jones, Andrew M. & Rice, Nigel, 2008. "Persistence in health limitations: A European comparative analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 1472-1488, December.
    10. Giarda, Elena, 2013. "Persistency of financial distress amongst Italian households: Evidence from dynamic models for binary panel data," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3425-3434.
    11. Chiara Mussida & Dario Sciulli, 2023. "Low pay and household poverty in Italy," Working Papers 635, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    12. Le Wen & Sholeh A. Maani, 2019. "Job mismatches and career mobility," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(10), pages 1010-1024, February.
    13. Pere Arqué-Castells & Pierre Mohnen, 2015. "Sunk Costs, Extensive R&D Subsidies and Permanent Inducement Effects," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 458-494, September.
    14. Jason Abrevaya & Yu-Chin Hsu, 2021. "Partial effects in non-linear panel data models with correlated random effects," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(3), pages 519-535.
    15. Prieto Suarez, Joaquin, 2021. "Poverty traps and affluence shields: modelling the persistence of income position in Chile," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110719, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Carlos Gradín & Olga Cantó, 2009. "Why are child poverty rates so persistently high in Spain?," Working Papers 123, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    17. Long Q. Trinh, 2016. "Dynamics of Innovation and Internationalization among Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Viet Nam," ADBI Working Papers 580, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    18. Ha Trong Nguyen & Luke B. Connelly, 2017. "The Dynamics of Informal Care Provision in an Australian Household Panel Survey: Previous Work Characteristics and Future Care Provision," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(302), pages 395-419, September.
    19. Elisa Giuliani & Federica Nieri & Andrea Vezzulli, 2019. "BEST IN CLASS BUT BIG WRONGDOERS: Exploring the financial performance and human rights infringe ments nexus in large emerging country companies," Discussion Papers 2019/250, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Toni Mora & Joan Gil & Antoni Sicras-Mainar, 2012. "The Influence of BMI, Obesity and Overweight on Medical Costs: A Panel Data Approach," Working Papers 2012-08, FEDEA.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:82:y:2013:i:c:p:108-114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.