Narratives of Bowel Cancer Screening in Hull
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Reasons behind People’s Narratives of Bowel Cancer Screening in Hull
IRAS ID
200327
Contact name
Yasmin Merali
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Hull
Duration of Study in the UK
2 years, 3 months, days
Research summary
This study aims to understand the reasons behind people's narratives of bowel cancer screening. There is some evidence that the stories that people tell themselves of cancer screening, tends to affect their screening behaviour significantly.
Moreover, there is also some evidence that the rate of bowel screening is lower among people of lower socioeconomic status and this may be related to their narratives. So, there is an inequality in bowel cancer screening across societies that disadvantages the worst-off people. However, what factors shape peoples' narratives is not well understood.
The present study aims to understand what factors (individual and social factors)influence people's narrative of bowel screening in Hull. To do this, we will apply complex systems approach.
In complex systems approach, it is believed that each case (individual and their narrative) is a complex system created by configuration (combination) of different conditions and it is the way and mode of that configuration that determines the outcome (here people's narrative of bowel cancer screening) and holding single factors as accountable for the outcome is not true.
We will try to understand configuration of what factors/conditions create different narratives of bowel cancer screening in Hull, especially among the better-off and the worst-off people in this city. By doing this we hope to better understand why people do or do not participate in bowel screening.
To gather the required data, we will interview people of over 60 who are eligible for bowel screening and will ask them about their experience, attitudes, and beliefs about bowel screening.
REC name
London - Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
16/LO/1531
Date of REC Opinion
10 Aug 2016
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion