Abstract
Abstract Background: Cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates have decreased significantly during the last 60 years as a result of wide spread cervical cancer screening, yet certain subgroups of women continue to be at elevated risk due to lack of screening; lesbians are one such group. To better understand the association between health beliefs and cervical cancer screening behaviors in lesbians, we adapted the Champion Health Belief Model Scale from its original focus on breast cancer screening to a focus on cervical cancer and screening via Papanicolaou (Pap) test. Purpose: The purpose of this pilot study was to assess the reliability and validity of our adapted version of the Health Belief Model Scale (HBMS) using an internet-based survey. Analysis included descriptive statistics of demographic data and internal consistency reliability estimates using Cronbach's alpha coefficients. Methods: HBMS items for perceived susceptibility, perceived seriousness, perceived benefits, and perceived barriers subscales were modified from their original form to reference cervical cancer (rather than breast cancer) and Pap testing (rather than mammography). In addition, we constructed a knowledge scale based on a series of true/false questions regarding risk factors for cervical cancer and recommendations for cervical cancer screening. Results: Complete data were available for 218 self-identified lesbian volunteers ranging in age from 18 to 68. Cronbach's internal consistency reliability coefficients were calculated for each subscale from our adaptation of the HBMS. Coefficients ranged from .75 to .91. Coefficients were similar to those reported previously. Conclusion: Our adaptation of the HMBS for assessing health beliefs regarding cervical cancer screening was determined to be reliable and valid. The HBMS-C has the potential to be a useful tool in ongoing studies of the associations between health beliefs and cervical cancer screening behaviors.Reliability coefficients for HBMS-CSubscaleAlphaSusceptibility.91Seriousness.88Benefits.79Barriers.81Knowledge.75 Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 101st Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2010 Apr 17-21; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2010;70(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 989.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
