Abstract

Background: Cancer screening saves lives, yet Muslim women participate less often, missing early diagnosis benefits. In 2021, we co-designed a faith-based educational intervention with Muslim women to include peer-led discussions, GP-led education, personal testimonials, and Islamic perspectives. This model was deployed in an acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy trial to improve the uptake of breast, colorectal, and cervical screening among UK Muslim women.

Methods: Underpinned by the Integrated Screening Action Model (I-SAM), we delivered the intervention with 235 Muslim women living in Glasgow or North-East England. Participants were allocated to either face-to-face or online intervention. Primary outcomes were assessment of key trial parameters (e.g. recruitment, peer-facilitator recruitment/training). Secondary outcomes included attitudes to screening, retention of barrier beliefs, and intention to obtain screening. Acceptability was explored qualitatively through focus groups and stakeholder interviews (n=31).

Results: The recruitment target (n=200) was met: 130 women were recruited in North-East England, 105 in Scotland, aged 25-74 (median 43), with 75% of Asian or Asian British origin. On the religious fatalism scale (3-15), the sample mean was 11.4, median 12, suggesting strong fatalistic beliefs. Peer-facilitators (n=15) were successfully recruited and trained to support intervention delivery. Some barriers to screening changed following the intervention (e.g. risk perception), although others did not (worry about male healthcare providers). Intention to engage in screening increased pre-intervention to post-intervention for breast (71.0% to 92.5%, p<0.001, n=200), cervical (63.4% to 92.3%, p<0.001, n=194), and colorectal (58.6% to 92.0%, p<0.001, n=174). Participants (n=31) found the intervention informative and enjoyable, and particularly liked the Islamic perspective and GP health education.

Conclusion: Preliminary results suggest the intervention is feasible, acceptable and effective. Additional analyses are underway, and 6- and 12-month follow-up data are being collected to examine this conclusion further. If confirmed, a larger-scale and randomised evaluation is needed to investigate intervention impact more robustly.