Objective:To present an evaluation indicator system for access to cancer screening services.Methods:The evaluation indicator pool was constructed through a scoping review. The theoretical framework was constructed based on the multi-source indicators, and the qualitative expert consultation method was employed to form the initial version of the three-level evaluation indicator system. Delphi expert consultation method was conducted in two rounds to evaluate the relevance, importance, and availability of the proposed evaluation indicator system. The expert positive coefficient, authority coefficient, coordination degree of expert opinions, and concentration of expert opinions were subjected to analysis. Subsequently, the three-level evaluation indicator system for access to cancer screening services was adjusted and determined based on the boundary value method and the open opinions of experts. Finally, the combination weight method was employed to determine the weight.Results:The initial version of the indicator system comprised 3 primary (first-level) indicators, 11 secondary (second-level) indicators, and 46 tertiary (third-level) indicators. Delphi expert consultation was conducted for the initial version, and 17 experts ultimately completed it, exhibiting a positive coefficient of 100% and an authority coefficient of 0.87. In comparison to the initial round of consultation, Kendall's W coefficient ranges (0.15-0.43, all P<0.05) of relevance, importance, and availability scores for each tertiary indicator in the second round exhibited an improvement. The analysis of the importance dimension indicates that expert opinions are also more concentrated, as evidenced by an increase of 8.5% and 7.0% in the proportion of the tertiary indicators with an arithmetic mean above 8 and a full mark ratio above 0.5, respectively. The final evaluation indicator system comprises three primary indicators, with the weights of structure evaluation, process evaluation, and outcome evaluation being 0.338, 0.378, and 0.285, respectively. It also comprises 11 secondary indicators and 45 tertiary indicators. Conclusions:The evaluation indicator system developed in this article can be an effective evaluation tool for quantitative comparison of access to cancer screening services across different populations, cancer types, and before and after intervention. Furthermore, it is recommended that the system undergo continuous optimization concerning its application.

Objective:To present an evaluation indicator system for access to cancer screening services.Methods:The evaluation indicator pool was constructed through a scoping review. The theoretical framework was constructed based on the multi-source indicators, and the qualitative expert consultation method was employed to form the initial version of the three-level evaluation indicator system. Delphi expert consultation method was conducted in two rounds to evaluate the relevance, importance, and availability of the proposed evaluation indicator system. The expert positive coefficient, authority coefficient, coordination degree of expert opinions, and concentration of expert opinions were subjected to analysis. Subsequently, the three-level evaluation indicator system for access to cancer screening services was adjusted and determined based on the boundary value method and the open opinions of experts. Finally, the combination weight method was employed to determine the weight.Results:The initial version of the indicator system comprised 3 primary (first-level) indicators, 11 secondary (second-level) indicators, and 46 tertiary (third-level) indicators. Delphi expert consultation was conducted for the initial version, and 17 experts ultimately completed it, exhibiting a positive coefficient of 100% and an authority coefficient of 0.87. In comparison to the initial round of consultation, Kendall's W coefficient ranges (0.15-0.43, all P<0.05) of relevance, importance, and availability scores for each tertiary indicator in the second round exhibited an improvement. The analysis of the importance dimension indicates that expert opinions are also more concentrated, as evidenced by an increase of 8.5% and 7.0% in the proportion of the tertiary indicators with an arithmetic mean above 8 and a full mark ratio above 0.5, respectively. The final evaluation indicator system comprises three primary indicators, with the weights of structure evaluation, process evaluation, and outcome evaluation being 0.338, 0.378, and 0.285, respectively. It also comprises 11 secondary indicators and 45 tertiary indicators. Conclusions:The evaluation indicator system developed in this article can be an effective evaluation tool for quantitative comparison of access to cancer screening services across different populations, cancer types, and before and after intervention. Furthermore, it is recommended that the system undergo continuous optimization concerning its application.

Morita therapy has been bom for more than 100 years.Inpatient Morita therapy is highly oper-able and easy to master.It can improve many refractory neuroses through four-stage treatment.But more neuroses are treated in outpatient clinics,and Morita therapy cannot be used in hospitalized patients.Therefore,the formula-tion of expert opinions on outpatient operations is particularly important.This paper is based on domestic and for-eign references,and after many discussions by domestic Morita therapy experts,and then drew up the first version of the expert opinions on operation of outpatient Morita therapy.Meanwhile the operation rule of Morita therapy in three stages of outpatient treatment was formulated:in the etiological analysis stage,under the theoretical guidance of Morita therapy,analyze the pathogenic factors,to improve treatment compliance and reduce resistance;during the operating stage,guide patients to engage in constructive and meaningful actions,realizing the achievement of letting nature take its course principle;in the cultivating character and enriching life stage,pay attention to positive infor-mation,expanding the scope and content of actions,improving the ability to adapt to complex life,and preventing recurrence caused by insufficient abilities.It will lay a foundation for the promotion of Morita therapy in domestic outpatient clinics,so that more patients with neurosis and other psychological diseases could receive characteristic Morita therapy treatment in outpatient clinics.

Objective: To understand the health literacy and relevant factors of cancer prevention consciousness in Chinese urban residents from 2015 to 2017. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 16 provinces covered by the Cancer Screening Program in Urban China from 2015 to 2017. A total of 32 257 local residents aged ≥18 years old who could understand the investigation procedure were included in the study by using the cluster sampling method and convenient sampling method. All local residents were categorized into four groups, which contained 15 524 community residents, 8 016 cancer risk assessment/screening population, 2 289 cancer patients and 6 428 occupational population, respectively. The self-designed questionnaire was used to collect the information of demographic characteristics and cancer prevention consciousness focusing on nine common risk factors, including smoking, alcohol, fiber food, food in hot temperature or pickled food, chewing betel nut, helicobacter pylori, moldy food, hepatitis B infection, estrogen, and exercise. The logistic regression model was adopted to identify the influencing factors. Results: The overall health literacy of the cancer prevention consciousness was 77.4% (24 980 participants), with 77.4% (12 018 participants), 79.9% (6 406 participants), 77.2% (1 766 participants) and 74.5% (4 709 participants) in each group (P<0.001). The correct response rates for nine risk factors ranged from 55.2% to 93.0%. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that compared with community residents, people with primary school level education or below, and the number of people living together in the family <3, the cancer risk assessment/screening intervention population, cancer patients, those with junior high school level educationor above and the number of people living in the family ≥3 had better health literacy of the cancer prevention consciousness (all P values <0.05). Compared with females, 39 years old and below, government-affiliated institutions or civil servants, from the eastern region, males, older than 40 years, company or enterprise employees, and from the middle or western region had worse health literacy of the cancer prevention consciousness (all P values <0.05). Conclusion The health literacy of the cancer prevention consciousness in Chinese urban residents should be improved. The cancer screening intervention, gender, age, education, occupation, the number of people co-living in the family, and residential region were associated with the health literacy of the cancer prevention consciousness.