Sarah Barter-Godfrey
Deakin University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Sarah Barter-Godfrey.
Health Education Journal | 2007
Sarah Barter-Godfrey; Ann Taket
Objective To understand low uptake of breast cancer screening through exploring the personal reasoning underlying womens attendance or non-attendance, and identifying differences between those who attend and those who decline. Design Cross-sectional survey. Setting Community and home environments of women eligible for breast screening aged 50—64 years, living in South East London. Method Structured, self-completed or assisted-completion questionnaires. Results The decision to attend or decline screening is rational and personally justifiable, engaging factors linked to emotions and attitude. Attitudes about breast screening and perceived personal importance of breast screening are the strongest predictors of attendance and non-attendance. There are differences between ethnic groups in perceptions of breast screening. Regular attendance at screening is associated with ethnicity, although consistent avoidance of mammography is not. Inconvenience is an important factor in missing appointments, and tends to be prolonged rather than specific to the time or day of the pre-booked invitation. GP and health worker advice are good persuaders towards attendance. Pain and anxiety during mammography are notable dissuaders against re-attending. Conclusion Appropriate service provision requires consideration of local factors, as well as the medical needs of the population eligible for breast screening. Lay perceptions of potential personal costs of attending or not attending breast screening are important for guiding health promotion. Information providers should consider the language needs of a culturally and educationally mixed community. Health care professionals are well placed to encourage uptake of breast screening through disseminating information that promotes attendance, both within and outside the breast screening service.
Primary Health Care Research & Development | 2007
Sarah Barter-Godfrey; Ann Taket; Gillian Rowlands
Background: Interventions that increase participation in physical activity and positive dietary changes may improve the health of the community through modifying the lifestyle contribution to preventable disease. However, previous evaluations have identified concerns about inequitable and unsustainable uptake, adherence and retention within healthy lifestyle schemes. Intervention study: The intervention evaluated here was designed to be a 12-week intervention for participants, offering free testing of physiological indicators of health, one-to-one health advice and a range of exercise, activity and cookery classes, at no or reduced cost, at local venues throughout the community. This paper reports the findings from a small qualitative study undertaken to explore the experiences and reflections of those who took part in the intervention to different extents, including those who fully and partially participated as well as those who dropped out or declined to take part. Method: Sixteen respondents took part in semi-structured interviews (5 male, 11 female; 8 black, 8 white; age range 25‐85). Findings: The findings suggest that participants assessed the healthy lifestyle intervention in terms of how well it met their pre-existing needs and opportunities for change, and that they selected the aspects of the scheme that suited them, interested them and were perceived as delivering salient results. There is also evidence for a stronger role of perceived support in influencing uptake and maintenance of lifestyle changes, and that support was conceptualised by participants as one of the services offered by the scheme. Perceived support and related perceptions of reliance on the scheme to sustain lifestyle changes also suggested that in some cases full adherence to a scheme is not as likely to produce long-term adherence to lifestyle changes as compared to partial, but more realistic adherence and smaller lifestyle changes. Implications for delivering and evaluating healthy lifestyle interventions are also discussed.
Archive | 2009
Ann Taket; Beth R. Crisp; Annemarie Nevill; Greer Lamaro; Melissa Graham; Sarah Barter-Godfrey
Archive | 2010
Catherine Itzin; Ann Taket; Sarah Barter-Godfrey
Australian Journal of Rural Health | 2011
Sarah Roberts; Melissa Graham; Sarah Barter-Godfrey
Theorising social exclusion | 2009
Sarah Barter-Godfrey; Ann Taket
Theorising social exclusion | 2009
Ann Taket; Beth R. Crisp; Annemarie Nevill; Greer Lamaro; Melissa Graham; Sarah Barter-Godfrey
Practising social inclusion | 2014
Sarah Barter-Godfrey; Sarah Pollock; Ann Taket
Archive | 2010
Shirley Firebrace; Reg Blow; Ann Taket; Sarah Pollock; Sarah Barter-Godfrey; Beryl Booth; Darryl Anderson; Troy Blow; Peta Farquhar; Samantha Furneaux; Teneha Greco; Chris Halacas; Mary Hassall; Stephanie Malcher; Scott Miller; Danielle Thomson
Archive | 2010
Catherine Itzin; Ann Taket; Sarah Barter-Godfrey