Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Una Macleod is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Una Macleod.


British Journal of Cancer | 2009

Risk factors for delayed presentation and referral of symptomatic cancer: evidence for common cancers.

Una Macleod; Elizabeth Mitchell; Caroline Burgess; Sara Macdonald; Amanda-Jane Ramirez

Background:It has been suggested that the known poorer survival from cancer in the United Kingdom, compared with other European countries, can be attributed to more advanced cancer stage at presentation. There is, therefore, a need to understand the diagnostic process, and to ascertain the risk factors for increased time to presentation.Methods:We report the results from two worldwide systematic reviews of the literature on patient-mediated and practitioner-mediated delays, identifying the factors that may influence these.Results:Across cancer sites, non-recognition of symptom seriousness is the main patient-mediated factor resulting in increased time to presentation. There is strong evidence of an association between older age and patient delay for breast cancer, between lower socio-economic status and delay for upper gastrointestinal and urological cancers and between lower education level and delay for breast and colorectal cancers. Fear of cancer is a contributor to delayed presentation, while sanctioning of help seeking by others can be a powerful mediator of reduced time to presentation. For practitioner delay, ‘misdiagnosis’ occurring either through treating patients symptomatically or relating symptoms to a health problem other than cancer, was an important theme across cancer sites. For some cancers, this could also be linked to inadequate patient examination, use of inappropriate tests or failing to follow-up negative or inconclusive test results.Conclusion:Having sought help for potential cancer symptoms, it is therefore important that practitioners recognise these symptoms, and examine, investigate and refer appropriately.


British Journal of Cancer | 2009

Public awareness of cancer in Britain: a population-based survey of adults

Kathryn A. Robb; S. Stubbings; Amanda-Jane Ramirez; Una Macleod; Joan Austoker; Jo Waller; Sara Hiom; Jane Wardle

Objective:To assess public awareness of cancer warning signs, anticipated delay and perceived barriers to seeking medical advice in the British population.Methods:We carried out a population-based survey using face-to-face, computer-assisted interviews to administer the cancer awareness measure (CAM), a newly developed, validated measure of cancer awareness. The sample included 2216 adults (970 males and 1246 females) recruited as part of the Office for National Statistics Opinions Survey using stratified probability sampling.Results:Awareness of cancer warning signs was low when open-ended (recall) questions were used and higher with closed (recognition) questions; but on either measure, awareness was lower in those who were male, younger, and from lower socio-economic status (SES) groups or ethnic minorities. The most commonly endorsed barriers to help seeking were difficulty making an appointment, worry about wasting the doctors time and worry about what would be found. Emotional barriers were more prominent in lower SES groups and practical barriers (e.g. too busy) more prominent in higher SES groups. Anticipated delay was lower in ethnic minority and lower SES groups. In multivariate analysis, higher symptom awareness was associated with lower anticipated delay, and more barriers with greater anticipated delay.Conclusions:A combination of public education about symptoms and empowerment to seek medical advice, as well as support at primary care level, could enhance early presentation and improve cancer outcomes.


British Journal of Cancer | 2015

Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

Richard D Neal; Puvan Tharmanathan; Nafees Ud Din; Symon Oyly D. Cotton; Julia Fallon-Ferguson; William Hamilton; A Hendry; Maggie Hendry; Ruth Lewis; Una Macleod; E D Mitchell; M Pickett; Tekendra Rai; K Shaw; Nicholas S. A. Stuart; Marie Louise Tørring; Clare Wilkinson; Briony Williams; Nefyn Williams; Jon Emery

Background:It is unclear whether more timely cancer diagnosis brings favourable outcomes, with much of the previous evidence, in some cancers, being equivocal. We set out to determine whether there is an association between time to diagnosis, treatment and clinical outcomes, across all cancers for symptomatic presentations.Methods:Systematic review of the literature and narrative synthesis.Results:We included 177 articles reporting 209 studies. These studies varied in study design, the time intervals assessed and the outcomes reported. Study quality was variable, with a small number of higher-quality studies. Heterogeneity precluded definitive findings. The cancers with more reports of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes were breast, colorectal, head and neck, testicular and melanoma.Conclusions:This is the first review encompassing many cancer types, and we have demonstrated those cancers in which more evidence of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes exists, and where it is lacking. We believe that it is reasonable to assume that efforts to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer are likely to have benefits for patients in terms of improved survival, earlier-stage diagnosis and improved quality of life, although these benefits vary between cancers.


Lancet Oncology | 2015

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control

Greg Rubin; Annette J. Berendsen; S Michael Crawford; Rachel M Dommett; Craig C. Earle; Jon Emery; Tom Fahey; Luigi Grassi; Eva Grunfeld; Sumit Gupta; Willie Hamilton; Sara Hiom; David J. Hunter; Georgios Lyratzopoulos; Una Macleod; Robert C. Mason; Geoffrey Mitchell; Richard D Neal; Michael D Peake; Martin Roland; Bohumil Seifert; Jeff Sisler; Jonathan Sussman; Stephen H. Taplin; Peter Vedsted; Teja Voruganti; Fiona M Walter; Jane Wardle; Eila Watson; David P. Weller

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise—from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists—has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care—its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families—are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.


British Journal of Cancer | 2009

Development of a measurement tool to assess public awareness of cancer.

S. Stubbings; Kathryn A. Robb; Jo Waller; Amanda-Jane Ramirez; Joan Austoker; Una Macleod; S. Hiom; Jane Wardle

Objective:We aimed to develop and validate a measurement tool to assess cancer awareness in the general population: the cancer awareness measure (CAM).Methods:Items assessing awareness of cancer warning signs, risk factors, incidence, screening programmes and attitudes towards help seeking were extracted from the literature or generated by expert groups. To determine reliability, the CAM was administered to a university participant panel (n=148), with a sub-sample (n=94) completing it again 2 weeks later. To establish construct validity, CAM scores of cancer experts (n=12) were compared with those of non-medical academics (n=21). Finally, university students (n=49) were randomly assigned to read either a cancer information leaflet or a leaflet with control information before completing the measure, to ensure the CAM was sensitive to change.Results:Cognitive interviewing indicated that the CAM was being interpreted as intended. Internal reliability (Cronbachs α=0.77) and test–retest reliability (r=0.81) were high. Scores for cancer experts were significantly higher than those for non-medical academics (t(31)=6.8, P<0.001). CAM scores were higher among students who received an intervention leaflet than the control leaflet (t(47)=4.8, P<0.001).Conclusions:These studies show the psychometric properties of the CAM and support its validity as a measure of cancer awareness in the general population.


British Journal of Cancer | 2006

Systematic review of factors influencing patient and practitioner delay in diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal cancer

Sara Macdonald; Una Macleod; Neil C Campbell; David Weller; Elizabeth Mitchell

As knowledge on the causation of cancers advances and new treatments are developed, early recognition and accurate diagnosis becomes increasingly important. This review focused on identifying factors influencing patient and primary care practitioner delay for upper gastrointestinal cancer. A systematic methodology was applied, including extensive searches of the literature published from 1970 to 2003, systematic data extraction, quality assessment and narrative data synthesis. Included studies were those evaluating factors associated with the time interval between a patient first noticing a cancer symptom and presenting to primary care, between a patient first presenting to primary care and being referred to secondary care, or describing an intervention designed to reduce those intervals. Twenty-five studies were included in the review. Studies reporting delay intervals demonstrated that the patient phase of delay was greater than the practitioner phase, whilst patient-related research suggests that recognition of symptom seriousness is more important than recognition of the presence of the symptom. The main factors related to practitioner delay were misdiagnosis, application and interpretation of tests, and the confounding effect of existing disease. Greater understanding of patient factors is required, along with evaluation of interventions to ensure appropriate diagnosis, examination and investigation.


Social Science & Medicine | 2009

'Getting through' not 'going under': A qualitative study of gender and spousal support after diagnosis with colorectal cancer

Carol Emslie; Susan Browne; Una Macleod; Linda Rozmovits; Elizabeth Mitchell; Sue Ziebland

Many studies have found that people with cancer value family support. Feminist work suggests that women carry most responsibility for practical and emotional support in families, but few qualitative cancer studies explicitly incorporate a gender perspective. We undertook secondary analysis of in-depth interviews with 33 married or cohabiting respondents with colorectal cancer in the UK to compare men and womens accounts of ‘spousal’ support. Both men and women described the vital role that their partners played in providing emotional and practical support. Mutual support and reciprocity were also key features of narratives; both men and women reported controlling their emotions to protect spouses and preserve ‘normal’ household routines. Traditional gender roles had some influence; some women organised ‘cover’ for domestic work and childcare when they were ill, while some men focused on making sure that their families were financially secure and partners were ‘protected’ from the effects of their stomas. Our findings illustrate the complexity of gendered constructions and performances of ‘care’ and contribute to debates about gender and emotional labour.


British Journal of Cancer | 2009

Awareness of cancer symptoms and anticipated help seeking among ethnic minority groups in England

Jo Waller; Kathryn A. Robb; S. Stubbings; Amanda-Jane Ramirez; Una Macleod; Joan Austoker; Sara Hiom; Jane Wardle

Objective:Little is known about ethnic differences in awareness of cancer-warning signs or help-seeking behaviour in Britain. As part of the National Awareness and Early Diagnosis Initiative (NAEDI), this study aimed to explore these factors as possible contributors to delay in cancer diagnosis.Methods:We used quota sampling to recruit 1500 men and women from the six largest minority ethnic groups in England (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Caribbean, African and Chinese). In face-to-face interviews, participants completed the newly developed cancer awareness measure (CAM), which includes questions about warning signs for cancer, speed of consultation for possible cancer symptoms and barriers to help seeking.Results:Awareness of warning signs was low across all ethnic groups, especially using the open-ended (recall) question format, with lowest awareness in the African group. Women identified more emotional barriers and men more practical barriers to help seeking, with considerable ethnic variation. Anticipated delay in help seeking was higher in individuals who identified fewer warning signs and more barriers.Conclusions:The study suggests the need for culturally sensitive, community-based interventions to raise awareness and encourage early presentation.


Thorax | 2009

Factors contributing to the time taken to consult with symptoms of lung cancer: a cross-sectional study.

Sarah Smith; Neil C Campbell; Una Macleod; Amanda J. Lee; Amalraj E Raja; Sally Wyke; Sue Ziebland; Eileen M Duff; Lewis D Ritchie; Marianne Nicolson

Objectives: To determine what factors are associated with the time people take to consult with symptoms of lung cancer, with a focus on those from rural and socially deprived areas. Methods: A cross-sectional quantitative interview survey was performed of 360 patients with newly diagnosed primary lung cancer in three Scottish hospitals (two in Glasgow, one in NE Scotland). Supplementary data were obtained from medical case notes. The main outcome measures were the number of days from (1) the date participant defined first symptom until date of presentation to a medical practitioner; and (2) the date of earliest symptom from a symptom checklist (derived from clinical guidelines) until date of presentation to a medical practitioner. Results: 179 participants (50%) had symptoms for more than 14 weeks before presenting to a medical practitioner (median 99 days; interquartile range 31–381). 270 participants (75%) had unrecognised symptoms of lung cancer. There were no significant differences in time taken to consult with symptoms of lung cancer between rural and/or deprived participants compared with urban and/or affluent participants. Factors independently associated with increased time before consulting about symptoms were living alone, a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and longer pack years of smoking. Haemoptysis, new onset of shortness of breath, cough and loss of appetite were significantly associated with earlier consulting, as were a history of chest infection and renal failure. Conclusion: For many people with lung cancer, regardless of location and socioeconomic status, the time between symptom onset and consultation was long enough to plausibly affect prognosis. Long-term smokers, those with COPD and/or those living alone are at particular risk of taking longer to consult with symptoms of lung cancer and practitioners should be alert to this.


BMJ | 2000

Primary and secondary care management of women with early breast cancer from affluent and deprived areas: retrospective review of hospital and general practice records

Una Macleod; Sue Ross; Chris Twelves; W D George; Charles R. Gillis; Graham Watt

Abstract Objectives: To investigate whether poorer survival of breast cancer among deprived women compared with affluent women is related to their NHS care. Design: Retrospective review of hospital and general practice case records. Setting: Greater Glasgow Health Board area. Subjects: Women diagnosed with breast cancer in 1992-3 who lived in the most affluent (deprivation categories 1 and 2) and the most deprived areas (deprivation categories 6 and 7) of Glasgow (Carstairs and Morris deprivation index). Main outcome measures: Breast cancer treatment, time from general practice consultation to clinic visit and surgery, and details of hospital admissions and follow up in primary and secondary care. Results: The access to care and surgical and oncological treatment of women from affluent and deprived areas were similar. Admissions to hospital for problems not related to breast cancer were more common in those living in deprived areas (number admitted once or more: 51 (24%) v13 (10%), P=0.001). Consultation patterns in general practice by the second year after diagnosis showed women in deprived areas consulting more frequently than women in affluent areas (median (interquartile range) number of consultations (5 (2-10) v 7 (4-13), P=0.01). Conclusion: Women living in affluent areas did not receive better NHS care for breast cancer than women in deprived areas. However, women from deprived areas seem to have greater comorbidity, and poorer outcomes from breast cancer among these women is probably due to factors which result in deprived communities having poorer health outcomes rather than to management of their breast cancer.

Collaboration


Dive into the Una Macleod's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jane Wardle

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Miriam Johnson

Hull York Medical School

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Trish Green

Hull York Medical School

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Carl May

University of Southampton

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge