Erratum: Influences on the uptake of diabetes screening: A qualitative study in primary care (British Journal of General Practice (2012) DOI: 10.3399/bjgp12X630106);Influences on the uptake of diabetes screening: A qualitative study in primary care

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 62, Issue 596, 2012, Pages 629-

  Eborall, Helen ^a   Stone, Margaret ^a   Aujla, Navneet ^a   Taub, Nicholas ^a   Khunti, Kamlesh ^a   Davies, Melanie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Oral glucose tolerance test; Primary care; Screening; Type 2 diabetes mellitus; Waist circumference

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTICE; HUMAN; MALE; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RISK FACTOR; SCREENING; SELF EXAMINATION; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; WAIST CIRCUMFERENCE;

EID: 84857710517     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3399/bjgp12X659240     Document Type: Erratum

References (34)

1. International Diabetes Federation.Diabetes atlas. 4th edn. Brussels: IDF, 2009. http://www.diabetesatlas.org (accessed 17 Jan 2012).
2. Gillies CL, Abrams KR, Lambert PC, et al. Pharmacological and lifestyle interventions to prevent or delay type 2 diabetes in people with impaired glucose tolerance: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2007; 334(7588): 299-302. (Pubitemid 46293963)
3. Gillies CL, Lambert PC, Abrams KR, et al. Different strategies for screening and prevention of type 2 diabetes in adults: cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ 2008; 336(7654): 1180-1185.
4. Webb DR, Gray LJ, Khunti K, et al. Screening for diabetes using an oral glucose tolerance test within a western multi-ethnic population identifies modifiable cardiovascular risk: the ADDITION-Leicester study. Diabetologia 2011; 54(9): 2237-2246.
5. Cardona-Morrell M, Rychetnik L, Morrell SL, et al. Reduction of diabetes risk in routine clinical practice: are physical activity and nutrition interventions feasible and are the outcomes from reference trials replicable? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 2010; 10: 653.
6. Department of Health. NHS health check: vascular checks, risk assessment and management best practice guidance. London: DoH, 2009. http://www.dh.gov.uk/ en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolic yAndGuidance/DH- 097489 (accessed 17 Jan 2012).
7. Department of Health. Free NHS health check: helping you prevent heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and kidney disease. London 2009: DoH, 2009. http://www.nhs.uk/Planners/NHSHealthCheck/Pages/NHSHealthCheck.aspx (accessed 17 Jan 2012).
8. National Screening Committee.The UKNSC policy on vascular risk screening in adults over 40. London: UK Screening Portal, 2007. http://www.screening.nhs. uk/vascularrisk (accessed 17 Jan 2012).
9. Carey VJ, Walters EE, Colditz GA, et al. Body fat distribution and risk of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in women. The Nurses' Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 145(7): 614-619. (Pubitemid 27154864)
10. Lindstrom J, Tuomilehto J. The diabetes risk score: a practical tool to predict type 2 diabetes risk. Diabetes Care 2003; 26(3): 725-731. (Pubitemid 36929335)
11. Manley SE, Sikarist KA, Lu ZX, et al. Validation of an algorithm combining haemoglobin A(1c) and fasting plasma glucose for diagnosis of diabetes mellitus in UK and Australian populations. Diabetic Med 2009; 26(2): 115-121.
12. Mostafa SA, Khunti K, Srinavasan BT, et al. Detecting type 2 diabetes and impaired glucose regulation using glycated hemoglobin in different populations. Diabetes Management 2011; 1: 77-97.
13. International Expert Committee. International Expert Committee report on the role of the A1c assay in the diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009; 32(7): 1327-1334.
14. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinologists. Statement on the use of A1c for the diagnosis of diabetes. https://www.aace.com/publications/position-statements (accessed 7 Feb 2012).
15. Kilpatrick ES, Bloomgarden ZT, Zimmet PZ. Is haemoglobin A1c a step forward for diagnosing diabetes? BMJ 2009; 339: 1288-1290.
16. American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 2009; 32(1): S62-67.
17. World Health Organization. Use of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Geneva:WHO, 2011.
18. Goyder E, Wild S, Fischbacher C, et al. Evaluating the impact of a national pilot screening programme for type 2 diabetes in deprived areas of England. Fam Pract 2008; 25(5): 370-375.
19. National Screening Committee. Programme appraisal criteria: criteria for appraising the viability, effectiveness and appropriateness of a screening programme 2003. London: UK Screening Portal. http://www.screening.nhs.uk/ criteria (accessed 17 Jan 2012).
20. Jepson R, Clegg A, Forbes C,et al. The determinants of screening uptake and interventions for increasing uptake: a systematic review. Health Technol Asses 2000; 4(14): i-vii, 1-133.
21. Howson A. Embodied obligation: the female body and health surveillance. In: Nettleton S, Watson J (eds.). The body in everyday life. London: Routledge, 1998.
22. Duncan B, Hart G, Scoular A. Screening and the construction of scepticism: the case of Chlamydia. Health 2001; 5(2): 165-185. (Pubitemid 33679222)
23. Chapple A, Ziebland S, Hewitson P, McPherson A. What affects the uptake of screening for bowel cancer using a faecal occult blood test (FOBt): a qualitative study. Soc Sci Med 2008; 66(12): 2425-2435. (Pubitemid 351657643)
24. Adriaanse MC, Snoek FJ, Dekker JM, et al. No substantial psychological impact of the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes following targeted population screening: the Hoorn screening study. Diabetic Med 2004; 21(9): 992-998. (Pubitemid 39215319)
25. Adriaanse MC, Snoek FJ. The psychological impact of screening for type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2006; 22(1): 20-25. (Pubitemid 43154457)
26. Eborall H, Griffin S, Prevost AT, et al. Psychological impact of screening for type 2 diabetes: controlled trial and comparative study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2007; 335(7618): 486-489. (Pubitemid 47401608)
27. Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage, 2006.
28. Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG (eds). Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge, 1994.
29. Dixon-Woods M, Tarrant C. Why do people cooperate in medical research? Findings from three studies. Soc Sci Med 2009; 68(12): 2215-2222.
30. Davison C, Davey Smith G, Frankel S. Lay epidemiology and the prevention paradox: the implications of coronary candidacy for health education. Soc Health Illness 1991; 13(1): 1-19.
31. Hunt K, Davison C, Emslie C, Ford G. Are perceptions of a family history of heart disease related to health-related attitudes and behaviours? Health Educ Res 2000; 15(2): 131-143. (Pubitemid 30195519)
32. Eborall H, Davies R, Kinmonth AL, et al. Patients' experiences of screening for type 2 diabetes: prospective qualitative study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2007; 335(7618): 490-493. (Pubitemid 47401609)
33. Dunkley AJ, Stone MA, Patel N, et al. Waist circumference measurement: knowledge, attitudes and barriers in patients and practitioners in amulti-ethnic population. Fam Pract 2009; 26(5): 365-371.
34. Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S, et al. Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6: 35.