Public health research & practice · 2026
Optimising SMS content for bowel cancer screening participation in Australia: cross-sectional national survey findings.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Perry Nicole, Ireland Michael J, Daken Kirstie, Wilson Carlene, Jenkins Mark, Ait Ouakrim Driss, McIntosh Jennifer G, Baxter Nancy N, Pearse Emma, Goodwin Belinda C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES AND IMPORTANCE OF STUDY: This study aimed to identify short message service (SMS) reminder content perceived as most likely to prompt bowel cancer screening, examine differences across sociodemographic subgroups, and explore preferences for timing and frequency.
METHODS: Australian residents (N = 1016) aged 50-74 years completed an online survey rating five SMS reminders presented in random order. Outcomes included perceived usefulness, likelihood of encouraging kit return, likelihood of irritation and clarity. Preferences for timing and frequency were also assessed. Bayesian multilevel modelling (cumulative probit) compared ratings across SMS types, with effect sizes expressed as standard deviation (s.d.) differences in perceived likelihood that each SMS would encourage kit return compared with a reminder-only message. Interactions with age, gender, socioeconomic status and screening history were explored.
RESULTS: Compared with a 'reminder-only' message, SMS content that encouraged storing the kit near the toilet (s.d. 0.44), conveyed general practitioner endorsement (s.d. 0.32) and gave instructions (s.d. 0.22) was more likely to prompt kit return. Responses varied slightly by age and area-level socioeconomic status. Most participants preferred two to three SMS reminders (mean 2.89, s.d. 6.73).
CONCLUSIONS: SMS reminders using behavioural prompts and clear, concise content may support improved screening participation. Tailored SMS messages that reflect public preferences may increase kit return rates, support national screening goals and reduce bowel cancer mortality.
METHODS: Australian residents (N = 1016) aged 50-74 years completed an online survey rating five SMS reminders presented in random order. Outcomes included perceived usefulness, likelihood of encouraging kit return, likelihood of irritation and clarity. Preferences for timing and frequency were also assessed. Bayesian multilevel modelling (cumulative probit) compared ratings across SMS types, with effect sizes expressed as standard deviation (s.d.) differences in perceived likelihood that each SMS would encourage kit return compared with a reminder-only message. Interactions with age, gender, socioeconomic status and screening history were explored.
RESULTS: Compared with a 'reminder-only' message, SMS content that encouraged storing the kit near the toilet (s.d. 0.44), conveyed general practitioner endorsement (s.d. 0.32) and gave instructions (s.d. 0.22) was more likely to prompt kit return. Responses varied slightly by age and area-level socioeconomic status. Most participants preferred two to three SMS reminders (mean 2.89, s.d. 6.73).
CONCLUSIONS: SMS reminders using behavioural prompts and clear, concise content may support improved screening participation. Tailored SMS messages that reflect public preferences may increase kit return rates, support national screening goals and reduce bowel cancer mortality.