Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population

Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	P. V. AshaRani [verfasserIn] Fiona Devi [verfasserIn] Peizhi Wang [verfasserIn] Edimansyah Abdin [verfasserIn] Yunjue Zhang [verfasserIn] Kumarasan Roystonn [verfasserIn] Anitha Jeyagurunathan [verfasserIn] Mythily Subramaniam [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2022

Schlagwörter:	Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: BMC Public Health - BMC, 2003, 22(2022), 1, Seite 16
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:22 ; year:2022 ; number:1 ; pages:16

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ026816806

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ026816806
003	DE-627
005	20230502071952.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230226s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ026816806
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RA1-1270
100	0		\|a P. V. AshaRani \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population
264		1	\|c 2022
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation.
650		4	\|a Diabetes
650		4	\|a Health screening
650		4	\|a Barriers
650		4	\|a Facilitators
650		4	\|a Mixed method
650		4	\|a Qualitative
653		0	\|a Public aspects of medicine
700	0		\|a Fiona Devi \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Peizhi Wang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Edimansyah Abdin \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Yunjue Zhang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Kumarasan Roystonn \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Anitha Jeyagurunathan \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Mythily Subramaniam \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t BMC Public Health \|d BMC, 2003 \|g 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 \|w (DE-627)326643583 \|w (DE-600)2041338-5 \|x 14712458 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:22 \|g year:2022 \|g number:1 \|g pages:16
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_224
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2001
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2006
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2008
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2015
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2020
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2021
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2025
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2031
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2038
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2044
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2048
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2050
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2056
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2057
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2061
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2113
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 22 \|j 2022 \|e 1 \|h 16

Indexfelder

author_variant	p v a pva f d fd p w pw e a ea y z yz k r kr a j aj m s ms
matchkey_str	article:14712458:2022----::atrifunigpaefibtselhcennaiemtos
hierarchy_sort_str	2022
callnumber-subject-code	RA
publishDate	2022
allfields	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 doi (DE-627)DOAJ026816806 (DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RA1-1270 P. V. AshaRani verfasserin aut Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation. Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative Public aspects of medicine Fiona Devi verfasserin aut Peizhi Wang verfasserin aut Edimansyah Abdin verfasserin aut Yunjue Zhang verfasserin aut Kumarasan Roystonn verfasserin aut Anitha Jeyagurunathan verfasserin aut Mythily Subramaniam verfasserin aut In BMC Public Health BMC, 2003 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 (DE-627)326643583 (DE-600)2041338-5 14712458 nnns volume:22 year:2022 number:1 pages:16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 22 2022 1 16
spelling	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 doi (DE-627)DOAJ026816806 (DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RA1-1270 P. V. AshaRani verfasserin aut Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation. Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative Public aspects of medicine Fiona Devi verfasserin aut Peizhi Wang verfasserin aut Edimansyah Abdin verfasserin aut Yunjue Zhang verfasserin aut Kumarasan Roystonn verfasserin aut Anitha Jeyagurunathan verfasserin aut Mythily Subramaniam verfasserin aut In BMC Public Health BMC, 2003 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 (DE-627)326643583 (DE-600)2041338-5 14712458 nnns volume:22 year:2022 number:1 pages:16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 22 2022 1 16
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 doi (DE-627)DOAJ026816806 (DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RA1-1270 P. V. AshaRani verfasserin aut Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation. Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative Public aspects of medicine Fiona Devi verfasserin aut Peizhi Wang verfasserin aut Edimansyah Abdin verfasserin aut Yunjue Zhang verfasserin aut Kumarasan Roystonn verfasserin aut Anitha Jeyagurunathan verfasserin aut Mythily Subramaniam verfasserin aut In BMC Public Health BMC, 2003 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 (DE-627)326643583 (DE-600)2041338-5 14712458 nnns volume:22 year:2022 number:1 pages:16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 22 2022 1 16
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 doi (DE-627)DOAJ026816806 (DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RA1-1270 P. V. AshaRani verfasserin aut Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation. Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative Public aspects of medicine Fiona Devi verfasserin aut Peizhi Wang verfasserin aut Edimansyah Abdin verfasserin aut Yunjue Zhang verfasserin aut Kumarasan Roystonn verfasserin aut Anitha Jeyagurunathan verfasserin aut Mythily Subramaniam verfasserin aut In BMC Public Health BMC, 2003 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 (DE-627)326643583 (DE-600)2041338-5 14712458 nnns volume:22 year:2022 number:1 pages:16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 22 2022 1 16
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 doi (DE-627)DOAJ026816806 (DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RA1-1270 P. V. AshaRani verfasserin aut Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation. Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative Public aspects of medicine Fiona Devi verfasserin aut Peizhi Wang verfasserin aut Edimansyah Abdin verfasserin aut Yunjue Zhang verfasserin aut Kumarasan Roystonn verfasserin aut Anitha Jeyagurunathan verfasserin aut Mythily Subramaniam verfasserin aut In BMC Public Health BMC, 2003 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 (DE-627)326643583 (DE-600)2041338-5 14712458 nnns volume:22 year:2022 number:1 pages:16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 22 2022 1 16
language	English
source	In BMC Public Health 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 volume:22 year:2022 number:1 pages:16
sourceStr	In BMC Public Health 22(2022), 1, Seite 16 volume:22 year:2022 number:1 pages:16
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative Public aspects of medicine
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	BMC Public Health
authorswithroles_txt_mv	P. V. AshaRani @@aut@@ Fiona Devi @@aut@@ Peizhi Wang @@aut@@ Edimansyah Abdin @@aut@@ Yunjue Zhang @@aut@@ Kumarasan Roystonn @@aut@@ Anitha Jeyagurunathan @@aut@@ Mythily Subramaniam @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2022-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	326643583
id	DOAJ026816806
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ026816806</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502071952.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ026816806</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RA1-1270</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">P. V. AshaRani</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Diabetes</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Health screening</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Barriers</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Facilitators</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Mixed method</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Qualitative</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Public aspects of medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fiona Devi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Peizhi Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Edimansyah Abdin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yunjue Zhang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kumarasan Roystonn</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Anitha Jeyagurunathan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mythily Subramaniam</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC Public Health</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2003</subfield><subfield code="g">22(2022), 1, Seite 16</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)326643583</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2041338-5</subfield><subfield code="x">14712458</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:22</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:16</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">22</subfield><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">16</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	P. V. AshaRani
spellingShingle	P. V. AshaRani misc RA1-1270 misc Diabetes misc Health screening misc Barriers misc Facilitators misc Mixed method misc Qualitative misc Public aspects of medicine Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population
authorStr	P. V. AshaRani
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)326643583
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RA1-1270
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	14712458
topic_title	RA1-1270 Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population Diabetes Health screening Barriers Facilitators Mixed method Qualitative
topic	misc RA1-1270 misc Diabetes misc Health screening misc Barriers misc Facilitators misc Mixed method misc Qualitative misc Public aspects of medicine
topic_unstemmed	misc RA1-1270 misc Diabetes misc Health screening misc Barriers misc Facilitators misc Mixed method misc Qualitative misc Public aspects of medicine
topic_browse	misc RA1-1270 misc Diabetes misc Health screening misc Barriers misc Facilitators misc Mixed method misc Qualitative misc Public aspects of medicine
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	BMC Public Health
hierarchy_parent_id	326643583
hierarchy_top_title	BMC Public Health
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)326643583 (DE-600)2041338-5
title	Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ026816806 (DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605
title_full	Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population
author_sort	P. V. AshaRani
journal	BMC Public Health
journalStr	BMC Public Health
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2022
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	16
author_browse	P. V. AshaRani Fiona Devi Peizhi Wang Edimansyah Abdin Yunjue Zhang Kumarasan Roystonn Anitha Jeyagurunathan Mythily Subramaniam
container_volume	22
class	RA1-1270
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	P. V. AshaRani
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in asian population
callnumber	RA1-1270
title_auth	Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population
abstract	Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation.
abstractGer	Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation.
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population
url	https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2 https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605 https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458
remote_bool	true
author2	Fiona Devi Peizhi Wang Edimansyah Abdin Yunjue Zhang Kumarasan Roystonn Anitha Jeyagurunathan Mythily Subramaniam
author2Str	Fiona Devi Peizhi Wang Edimansyah Abdin Yunjue Zhang Kumarasan Roystonn Anitha Jeyagurunathan Mythily Subramaniam
ppnlink	326643583
callnumber-subject	RA - Public Medicine
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2
callnumber-a	RA1-1270
up_date	2024-07-03T23:05:57.507Z
_version_	1803601007097151488
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ026816806</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502071952.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ026816806</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RA1-1270</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">P. V. AshaRani</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Background Health screens are the cornerstones for health promotion and preventive interventions at a community level. This study investigated the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of diabetes health screening in the general population of Singapore. Methods In this mixed methods study, participants without diabetes were recruited from the general population. The quantitative phase (n = 2459) included face to face survey of participants selected through disproportionate stratified random sampling. Those who participated in the quantitative survey were then randomly chosen for a one-to-one semi-structured interview (n = 30). Results Among the survey respondents, 73.09% (n = 1777) had attended a diabetes health screening in their lifetime whilst 42.36% (n = 1090) and 57.64% (n = 1328, p < 0.0001) attended the health screens regularly (every 12 months) and irregularly, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of older adults (≥ 40 years) attended regular diabetes health screening compared to younger adults (less than 40 years; 55.59% vs 24.90%, p < 0.001). The top 3 reasons for attending regular health screens were to detect diabetes early, to make lifestyle changes in case of a diagnosis and being health conscious. Qualitative interviews identified similar issues and complex nuances that influenced the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Several personal factors (laziness, self-reliance, psychological factors, etc.), competing priorities, fatalistic beliefs, affordability, misconceptions about the screens, and appointment related factors (inconvenient location, time, etc.) were identified as barriers, while affordable screens, sense of personal responsibility, perception of susceptibility /risk, role of healthcare team (e.g. reminders and prescheduled appointments) and personal factors (e.g. age, family, etc.) were facilitators. Age, household income, ethnicity and educational level were associated with the uptake of regular diabetes health screening. Conclusion The uptake of regular diabetes health screening can be improved. Several barriers and enablers to the uptake of diabetes health screening were identified which should be addressed by the policy makers to alleviate misconceptions and create greater awareness of the importance of the programme that will improve participation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Diabetes</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Health screening</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Barriers</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Facilitators</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Mixed method</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Qualitative</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Public aspects of medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fiona Devi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Peizhi Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Edimansyah Abdin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yunjue Zhang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kumarasan Roystonn</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Anitha Jeyagurunathan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mythily Subramaniam</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC Public Health</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2003</subfield><subfield code="g">22(2022), 1, Seite 16</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)326643583</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2041338-5</subfield><subfield code="x">14712458</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:22</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:16</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/03ae5739f0134b6db994c7368baca605</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13914-2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">22</subfield><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">16</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3978424

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Factors influencing uptake of diabetes health screening: a mixed methods study in Asian population

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?