Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of brjgenpracRCGP homepageJ R Coll Gen Pract at PubMed CentralBJGP at RCGPBJGP at RCGP
Br J Gen Pract. 1991 December; 41(353): 510–513.
PMCID: PMC1371864

Understanding the uptake of cervical cancer screening: the contribution of the health belief model.


The health belief model, explaining health and illness behaviour, is 25 years old. Criticisms of the model have included its abstract nature and its emphasis on the rationality of patients' behaviour. Its lack of predictive power means it provides a useful framework rather than a true model. The health belief model is used here to review the literature that has advanced our understanding of the factors affecting uptake of cervical screening. The influence of age and social class on perceptions of vulnerability, and the costs and benefits of screening are highlighted. The body of work reviewed has helped expose inherent limitations of screening programmes. The main obstacles to the success of cervical screening are organizational, for example, the inaccuracy of address registers. Numerous ways of encouraging uptake are identified. These include appropriately worded invitations and educational material, personalized approaches from members of the primary health care team and flexible surgery hours. The incentives introduced under the 1990 general practitioner contract are likely to help increase uptake.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (926K), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Rosenstock IM. Why people use health services. Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966 Jul;44(3 Suppl):94–127. [PubMed]
  • Becker MH, Maiman LA. Sociobehavioral determinants of compliance with health and medical care recommendations. Med Care. 1975 Jan;13(1):10–24. [PubMed]
  • Wallston BD, Wallston KA. Locus of control and health: a review of the literature. Health Educ Monogr. 1978 Spring;6(2):107–117. [PubMed]
  • Day NE. Screening for cancer of the cervix. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1989 Jun;43(2):103–106. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Chamberlain J. Failures of the cervical cytology screening programme. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984 Oct 6;289(6449):853–854. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Elkind A, Eardley A, Thompson R, Smith A. How district health authorities organise cervical screening. BMJ. 1990 Oct 20;301(6757):915–918. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Bowling A, Jacobson B. Screening: the inadequacy of population registers. BMJ. 1989 Mar 4;298(6673):545–546. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Richards ND, McEwan PJ. Sociological factors affecting use of cervical screening tests. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1973 Feb;27(1):65–66. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Elkind AK, Haran D, Eardley A, Spencer B. Computer-managed cervical cytology screening: a pilot study of non-attenders. Public Health. 1987 Jul;101(4):253–266. [PubMed]
  • Sansom CD, MacInerney J, Oliver V, Wakefield J, Yule R. Recall of women in a cervical cytology screening programme. An estimate of the true rate of response. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1975 Jun;29(2):131–134. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hesselius I, Lisper HO, Nordström A, Anshelm-Olson B, Odlund B. Comparison between participants and non-participants at a gynaecological mass screening. Scand J Soc Med. 1975;3(3):129–138. [PubMed]
  • Elkind AK, Haran D, Eardley A, Spencer B. Reasons for non-attendance for computer-managed cervical screening: pilot interviews. Soc Sci Med. 1988;27(6):651–660. [PubMed]
  • Elkind A, Eardley A, Haran D, Spencer B, Smith A. Computer-managed call and recall for cervical screening: a typology of reasons for non-attendance. Community Med. 1989 May;11(2):157–162. [PubMed]
  • Scaife B. Survey of cervical cytology in general practice. Br Med J. 1972 Jul 22;3(5820):200–202. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Beardow R, Oerton J, Victor C. Evaluation of the cervical cytology screening programme in an inner city health district. BMJ. 1989 Jul 8;299(6691):98–100. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Rundall TG, Wheeler JR. The effect of income on use of preventive care: an evaluation of alternative explanations. J Health Soc Behav. 1979 Dec;20(4):397–406. [PubMed]
  • Coulter A. Lifestyles and social class: implications for primary care. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1987 Dec;37(305):533–536. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Khassis U, Tillman I. Integration of the health education component in the opening of a new regional hospital in Jerusalem. Int J Health Educ. 1978;21(2):116–119. [PubMed]
  • French K, Porter AM, Robinson SE, McCallum FM, Howie JG, Roberts MM. Attendance at a breast screening clinic: a problem of administration or attitudes. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 285(6342):617–620. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Wilkinson C, Jones JM, McBride J. Anxiety caused by abnormal result of cervical smear test: a controlled trial. BMJ. 1990 Feb 17;300(6722):440–440. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Nathoo V. Investigation of non-responders at a cervical cancer screening clinic in Manchester. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1988 Apr 9;296(6628):1041–1042. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Schwartz M, Savage W, George J, Emohare L. Women's knowledge and experience of cervical screening: a failure of health education and medical organization. Community Med. 1989 Nov;11(4):279–289. [PubMed]
  • Kegeles SS. A field experimental attempt to change beliefs and behavior of women in an urban ghetto. J Health Soc Behav. 1969 Jun;10(2):115–124. [PubMed]
  • Reid GS, Robertson AJ, Bissett C, Smith J, Waugh N, Halkerston R. Cervical screening in Perth and Kinross since introduction of the new contract. BMJ. 1991 Aug 24;303(6800):447–450. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Evans DM, Hibbard BM, Jones JM, Sweetnam P. The Cardiff Cervical Cytology Study: prevalence of cytological grades and initial histological findings. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1981 Feb 28;282(6265):689–691. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Kapp DS, Fischer D, Gutierrez E, Kohorn EI, Schwartz PE. Pretreatment prognostic factors in carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a multivariable analysis of the effect of age, stage, histology and blood counts on survival. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1983 Apr;9(4):445–455. [PubMed]
  • Fruchter RG, Boyce J, Hunt M. Missed opportunities for early diagnosis of cancer of the cervix. Am J Public Health. 1980 Apr;70(4):418–420. [PubMed]
  • Fletcher A. Screening for cancer of the cervix in elderly women. Lancet. 1990 Jan 13;335(8681):97–99. [PubMed]
  • Weintraub NT, Violi E, Freedman ML. Cervical cancer screening in women aged 65 and over. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1987 Sep;35(9):870–875. [PubMed]
  • Zola IK. Pathways to the doctor-from person to patient. Soc Sci Med. 1973 Sep;7(9):677–689. [PubMed]
  • Pill R, Stott NC. Choice or chance: further evidence on ideas of illness and responsibility for health. Soc Sci Med. 1985;20(10):981–991. [PubMed]
  • Langlie JK. Social networks, health beliefs, and preventive health behavior. J Health Soc Behav. 1977 Sep;18(3):244–260. [PubMed]
  • Calnan M. The health belief model and participation in programmes for the early detection of breast cancer: a comparative analysis. Soc Sci Med. 1984;19(8):823–830. [PubMed]
  • Bowling A. Implications of preventive health behaviour for cervical and breast cancer screening programmes: a review. Fam Pract. 1989 Sep;6(3):224–231. [PubMed]
  • McCormick JS. Cervical smears: a questionable practice? Lancet. 1989 Jul 22;2(8656):207–209. [PubMed]

Articles from The British Journal of General Practice are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners