A cross-sectional survey assessing factors associated with reading cancer screening information: previous screening behaviour, demographics and decision-making style

How do young women approaching screening age interpret the NHS cervical screening leaflet? A mixed methods study of identifying interpretation difficulties, barriers, facilitators, and leaflet interpretation, engagement and future screening behaviour

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is a common cancer among young women aged 25-29 in England, and the NHS cervical screening leaflet is the first point of contact for those being invited for their first screening. This study aimed to explore how young women (18-24) understand and engage with the leaflet, as well as the barriers and facilitators associated with its interpretation, engagement, and screening intentions.

METHODS

The study used a mixed-methods approach, including a survey (n = 120) to identify interpretation difficulties and how they were affected by different characteristics, and a follow-up interview (n = 10) to assess the utility of the leaflet, identify issues with its practicality, and determine the factors that influence screening intentions.

RESULTS

The survey results showed that interpretation difficulties were common, particularly regarding HPV assessment, screening results, additional tests/treatment, and screening risks. Lower interpretation accuracy was associated with lower numeracy scores and non-white ethnicity. Despite these difficulties, participants had high confidence and motivation to engage with the leaflet. The interviews revealed knowledge gaps, issues with the leaflet's practicality, and a preference for digital information. Factors that were identified as barriers and facilitators of leaflet interpretation, engagement, and screening intentions included knowledge, social influence, beliefs about consequences, environmental context and resources, social role and identity, emotions and intentions.

CONCLUSION

The current leaflet does not provide enough information for young women to make an informed decision about screening attendance. Implementing a digital invitation featuring simplified gist representation, targeted behaviour change techniques (BCTs), videos, and interactive tools can enhance education and promote screening behaviour. Future research should consider using digital tools and strategies to address existing barriers related to interpretation and engagement.

Factors influencing organised faecal occult blood test screening participation in culturally and linguistically diverse populations: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature examining factors influencing participation in organised faecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening programmes in culturally and linguistically diverse populations. This article addresses gaps in the literature by providing a mixed methods review of the multilevel influences on FOBT screening in culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) populations. This review was guided by the question "What are the factors influencing participation in organised FOBT screening programs in CALD populations?"

STUDY DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was used to summarise the available evidence. A thematic analysis of the included studies was undertaken to identify factors influencing organised FOBT screening participation in CALD populations from the literature.

RESULTS

FOBT screening participation was lower by ethnicity, religion, birthplace and language spoken. Barriers to screening included, faecal aversion, fatalism, fear of cancer, language and literacy barriers, difficulty accessing translated materials and low colorectal screening knowledge and awareness. CALD populations also had lower perceived benefits, susceptibility and cues to action, higher perceived barriers and greater perceived external health locus control than non-CALD populations. Facilitators of screening included positive attitudes to screening, general practitioner recommendations and social support. Group education sessions and narrative-based screening information were found to increase screening participation.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the range of interrelated factors influencing participation in organised FOBT screening programmes in CALD populations and proposes multicomponent interventions to address low screening uptake. Features of successful community-level interventions should be explored further. Narratives show promise for engaging CALD populations. Accessibility of screening information should be addressed at the system level. Leveraging the general practitioner relationship in promoting FOBT screening programmes may also be an effective strategy to target 'hard-to-reach' populations.

How do women comply with cancer screenings? A study in four regions of France

BACKGROUND

This article looks at the behaviour of women facing different cancer screening options available to them from the age of 50 onward. The study was conducted in 2019 in four departments of the French territory with the objective of identifying the factors that influence acceptance of a population-based screening proposal.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to women who had received three invitations to organised screenings (OS) for both breast and colorectal cancer. The categories of participants in both OS were designed from data from the regional cancer screening coordination centres in each department. Participation in opportunistic cervical cancer screening was evaluated as self-reported data.

RESULTS

4,634 questionnaires were returned out of the 17,194 sent, giving a global return rate of 27%. The highest rate of return (73.5%) was obtained from women who had participated at least once in both breast and colorectal cancer OS. An intermediate rate was obtained from women participating in breast cancer OS only (18.7%). Poor levels of return came from women who had participated in colorectal cancer OS only (3.6%) and from non-participants (4.1%). Our results suggest that women with lower educational levels tend to be the most regular attendants at OS (50.3%), compared to highly educated women (39.7%). 11.8% of women were overdue in their opportunistic cervical cancer screening. This percentage rose to 35.4% in the category of non-participants. In addition, women's comments provide a better understanding of the reasons for irregular attendance and non-participation.

CONCLUSION

Overall, similar behaviours towards screening were observed in the four departments. Our analysis suggests that participation in one cancer OS increases the likelihood of participating in others. This adhesion could be an interesting lever for raising women's awareness of other cancer screenings.

Decision-making styles of patients and general population in health care: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Decision-making styles form the backbone of effective decision-making and show promise as an important construct that warrants further attention. We investigated what is known about decision-making styles among patients and the general population in a health care setting.

METHODS

We used Arksey and O'Malley's framework and searched PubMed and CINAHL databases using relevant combinations of keywords and subject headings. Articles were limited to those published in English up to February 2020.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles met the inclusion criteria. We found that decision-making styles were described as role preferences or personality, psychological, and cognitive factors that influence decision-making. In the identified studies, the evidence was scarce regarding decision-making styles as the foundation for effective decision-making. Moreover, most studies were vague in the description of decision-making styles, offered little explanation of the concept, and varied substantially in the terminology, numbers, and types of decision-making styles and measurement methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision-making styles, as a dynamic process, have received little attention in health care and are rarely addressed in health communication research or investigations of decision-making support. Other frameworks that are not directly related to decision-making styles were used in most analyzed studies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Decision-making styles in health care should be reinterpreted as a dynamic process that can be developed or changed.

Inequalities in cancer screening, prevention and service engagement between UK ethnic minority groups

More people in the UK are living with cancer than ever before. With an increasingly ethnically diverse population, greater emphasis must be placed on understanding factors influencing cancer outcomes. This review seeks to explore UK-specific variations in engagement with cancer services in minority ethnic groups and describe successful interventions. The authors wish to highlight that, despite improvement to engagement and education strategies, inequalities still persist and work to improve cancer outcomes across our communities still needs to be prioritised. There are many reasons why cancer healthcare inequities exist for minority communities, reported on a spectrum ranging from cultural beliefs and awareness, through to racism. Strategies that successfully enhanced engagement included language support; culturally-sensitive reminders; community-based health workers and targeted outreach. Focusing on the diverse city of Leicester the authors describe how healthcare providers, researchers and community champions have worked collectively, delivering targeted community-based strategies to improve awareness and access to cancer services.

Effect of an information leaflet on breast cancer screening participation: A cluster randomized controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the impact of an information leaflet about the risk-benefit balance of breast cancer screening on women’s participation.

Methods

This cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted within a population-based breast cancer screening program and included women from the catchment areas of two hospitals in Barcelona, Spain. We evaluated women aged 50–69 years invited to screening between September 2019 and January 2020. The intervention group received an information leaflet on the benefits and harms of mammography screening. The control group received the usual invitation letter. The clusters consisted of the processing days of the invitation letter, assigned to the intervention with a simple random allocation scheme. We compared the participation rate at the individual level between groups, stratified by hospital and by per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses.

Results

We included 11,119 women (137 clusters): 5416 in the intervention group (66 clusters) and 5703 in the control group (71 clusters). A total of 36% (1964/5393) of the women in the intervention group and 37% (2135/5694) of those in the control group attended screening, respectively. Overall, we found no differences in participation among groups (difference in participation − 1.1%; 95%CI; − 2.9 to 0.7%). In a hospital attending a population with a low socioeconomic status, attendance was lower in the intervention group (− 1.4, 95%CI: − 5.7% to − 0.03%).

Conclusions

Overall participation in our program was unaffected by a new information leaflet on the risk-benefit balance of breast cancer screening. However, participation was lower in certain populations with lower socioeconomic status

Trial registration

Trial registration number ISRCTN13848929.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11360-0.

Psychometric properties of the SCREESCO questionnaire used in a colorectal cancer screening programme-A Rasch analysis

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancer diagnoses among both sexes. Sweden has not yet implemented any CRC screening programme, but a study, Screening of Swedish Colons (SCREESCO), is ongoing. The movement within the health care sector towards a more participatory perspective has led to the increased importance of shared decision making (SDM), and this is suggestively applied when deciding upon screening participation. There is no Swedish questionnaire for assessing the level of SDM in relation to CRC screening. Therefore, the CRC screening module of the National Survey of Medical Decisions was translated and culturally adapted into a Swedish context: the SCREESCO questionnaire.

AIM

The SCREESCO questionnaire requires further evaluation, and therefore, the aim, by using the Rasch approach, was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SCREESCO questionnaire.

METHODS

A Rasch partial credit model was chosen to investigate the psychometric properties. The sample consisted of individuals invited to the SCREESCO programme, who have answered the SCREESCO questionnaire.

RESULTS

Rating scale structures indicated stability for the response structure used. Satisfactory evidence for validity of internal structure was also shown for the whole questionnaire and two of three concepts/subscales, after deletion of a few items. Validity in response processes indicated acceptable, or close to acceptable, findings, while the results for unidimensionality and differential item functioning (DIF) were somewhat mixed. Separation index revealed less satisfactory results, both for the whole questionnaire and the concepts/subscales.

CONCLUSION

This Rasch analysis of the SCREESCO questionnaire revealed that the questionnaire in its current form has difficulties to assess the level of SDM in relation to CRC screening. The achieved results will guide further evaluation and development with the long-term goal of having a Swedish questionnaire, to be used in the health care sector, assessing the level of SDM in relation to CRC screening.

Preference for Deliberation and Perceived Usefulness of Standard- and Narrative-Style Leaflet Designs: Implications for Equitable Cancer-Screening Communication

BACKGROUND

In the UK, cancer-screening invitations are mailed with information styled in a standard, didactic way to allow for informed choice. Information processing theory suggests this "standard style" could be more appealing to people who prefer deliberative thinking. People less likely to engage in deliberative thinking may be disenfranchised by the design of current standard-style information.

PURPOSE

To examine the distribution of preference for deliberative thinking across demographic groups (Study 1) and explore associations between preference for deliberative thinking and perceived usefulness of standard- and narrative-style screening information (Study 2).

METHODS

In Study 1, adults aged 45-59 (n = 4,241) were mailed a questionnaire via primary care assessing preference for deliberative thinking and demographic characteristics. In Study 2, a separate cohort of adults aged 45-59 (n = 2,058) were mailed standard- and narrative-style leaflets and a questionnaire assessing demographic characteristics, preference for deliberative thinking, and perceived leaflet usefulness. Data were analyzed using multiple regression.

RESULTS

In Study 1 (n = 1,783) and Study 2 (n = 650), having lower socioeconomic status, being a women, and being of nonwhite ethnicity was associated with lower preference for deliberative thinking. In Study 2, the standard-style leaflet was perceived as less useful among participants with lower preference for deliberative thinking, while perceived usefulness of the narrative-style leaflet did not differ by preference for deliberative thinking.

CONCLUSIONS

Information leaflets using a standard style may disadvantage women and those experiencing greater socioeconomic deprivation. More work is required to identify design styles that have a greater appeal for people with low preference for deliberative thinking.

Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Our study examined the use of decision-making styles, as identified by Scott and Bruce (1995) (i.e. differentiating between a rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous decision-making style), within the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In the field of cancer screening, informed decision-making is considered important, which follows the Rational Decision model. Subsequently, gaining more insight into decision-making styles being used in real life, could improve support to people when making their screening decision. In addition, we examined whether the decision-making style that people used was associated with their experienced decisional conflict.

METHODS

An online survey was carried out among a sample of first-time CRC screening invitees (1282 respondents, response rate 49%). We assessed people's decision-making styles, CRC screening participation, education level, self-reported health literacy, and decisional conflict, and examined the possible associations between them.

RESULTS

In our study, people who had to decide about CRC screening scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. Respondents scoring higher on using a spontaneous or dependent decision-making style were more likely to have participated in CRC screening, while respondents scoring higher on using an avoidant decision-making style were more likely not to have participated in CRC screening. However, differences were small. Generally, people in our study experienced low decisional conflict.

CONCLUSION

Our eligible CRC screening population scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. To optimise support to people, public education materials could be appealing more to the intuitive processes at hand. That being said, the current education materials aimed at informed/rational decision-making do not necessarily seem to create a problem, as people generally experienced low decisional conflict. Possible concerns regarding the use of a spontaneous, dependent or avoidant decision-making style could be that these styles might be contributing to less informed decisions. However, it is relevant to consider that the found differences are small and that any possible concern applies to a relatively small group of people.

How Do Women Interpret the NHS Information Leaflet about Cervical Cancer Screening?

Background. Organized screening programs often rely on written materials to inform the public. In the United Kingdom, women invited for cervical cancer screening receive a leaflet from the National Health Service (NHS) to support screening decisions. However, information about screening may be too complex for people to understand, potentially hindering informed decision making. Objectives. We aimed to identify women's difficulties in interpreting the leaflet used in England and negative and positive responses to the leaflet. Methods. We used a sequential mixed-methods design involving 2 steps: cognitive think-aloud interviews (n = 20), followed by an England-wide survey (n = 602). Data were collected between June 2017 and December 2018, and participants included women aged 25 to 64 y with varying sociodemographics. Results. Interview results revealed misunderstandings concerning screening results, benefits, and additional tests and treatment, although participants tended to react positively to numerical information. Participants were often unfamiliar with the potential harms associated with screening (i.e., screening risks), key aspects of human papillomavirus, and complex terms (e.g., dyskaryosis). Survey results indicated that interpretation difficulties were common (M correct items = 12.5 of 23). Lower understanding was associated with lower educational level (β's >0.15, P's <0.001), lower numeracy scores (β = 0.36, P < 0.001), and nonwhite ethnicity (β = 0.10, P = 0.007). The leaflet was evaluated positively overall. Conclusions. Despite previous user testing of the leaflet, key information may be too complex for some recipients. As a consequence, they may struggle to make informed decisions about screening participation based on the information provided. We discuss implications for the improvement of communications about screening and decision support.

Prevalence and determinants in cytology testing for cervical cancer screening in Spain (2006-14)

Background

Cervical cancer has decreased in developed countries thanks to cytology screening programmes. The aims of this study were To analyse the frequency and evolution of performing cytology tests and to determine the variables that influence their use.

Methods

Cross-sectional study of non-institutionalized women who participated in the national health survey (2006, 2011/12) and the European Health Survey in Spain (2009, 2014). Study variables: cytology-testing, time since last cytology-test, reason for performing the test, age, nationality, marital status, social status, education level and place of residence.

Results

The study evaluated 53 628 women in Spain over 15 years old, with a mean age of 52.68 (SD ± 19.12). About 94.1% were Spanish, 49.2% were married and 77.2% lived with a partner. In 2014, 72% had a cytology test, a number that increased significantly. Women aged 25-65 were 5.13 times more likely to undergo a cytology test than those aged 15-24 years old (odds ratio (OR): 5.13; P < 0.001); women with university educations were 9.23 times more likely to undergo a cytology test than those without university educations (P > 0.001); those of social classes I and II (high) were 1.2 more likely to undergo a cytology test than those of low social class (P = 0.026); and Spanish women were 1.74 times more likely to undergo a cytology test than foreigners living in Spain (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Frequency of cytology testing has increased in the last few years. Screening for cervical cancer is associated with higher social status, education level, age, and not being foreign.

PRISMA and AMSTAR show systematic reviews on health literacy and cancer screening are of good quality

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs) on health literacy and cancer screening and to investigate factors that may influence overall quality.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We reviewed SRs published between 2009 and 2017. We calculated indices to represent the included SRs' adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). To assess possible determinants of SRs' quality, we regressed the index scores on year and region of publication, journal impact factor, authors' reported use of PRISMA, and presence of funding statements.

RESULTS

We included 19 SRs, and median index scores were 0.86 for PRISMA (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.11; range = 0.32-1.00) and 0.67 for AMSTAR (IQR = 0.30; range = 0.22-1.00). Methodological and reporting problems pertained to protocol registration or publication, number of raters used, gray literature searches, excluded article lists, and unintegrated discussions of risk of bias and efficacy. Only journal impact factor was statistically significantly associated (positively) with PRISMA and AMSTAR index scores.

CONCLUSION

The quality of SRs on health literacy and cancer screening was generally good. Systematic reviewers should register or publish their protocols, include PRISMA and AMSTAR checklists when submitting SRs to journals, and self-evaluate their SRs before submission.

Describing the Process of Adopting Nutrition and Fitness Apps: Behavior Stage Model Approach

BACKGROUND

Although mobile technologies such as smartphone apps are promising means for motivating people to adopt a healthier lifestyle (mHealth apps), previous studies have shown low adoption and continued use rates. Developing the means to address this issue requires further understanding of mHealth app nonusers and adoption processes. This study utilized a stage model approach based on the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM), which proposes that people pass through qualitatively different motivational stages when adopting a behavior.

OBJECTIVE

To establish a better understanding of between-stage transitions during app adoption, this study aimed to investigate the adoption process of nutrition and fitness app usage, and the sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics and decision-making style preferences of people at different adoption stages.

METHODS

Participants (N=1236) were recruited onsite within the cohort study Konstanz Life Study. Use of mobile devices and nutrition and fitness apps, 5 behavior adoption stages of using nutrition and fitness apps, preference for intuition and deliberation in eating decision-making (E-PID), healthy eating style, sociodemographic variables, and body mass index (BMI) were assessed.

RESULTS

Analysis of the 5 behavior adoption stages showed that stage 1 ("unengaged") was the most prevalent motivational stage for both nutrition and fitness app use, with half of the participants stating that they had never thought about using a nutrition app (52.41%, 533/1017), whereas less than one-third stated they had never thought about using a fitness app (29.25%, 301/1029). "Unengaged" nonusers (stage 1) showed a higher preference for an intuitive decision-making style when making eating decisions, whereas those who were already "acting" (stage 4) showed a greater preference for a deliberative decision-making style (F4,1012=21.83, P<.001). Furthermore, participants differed widely in their readiness to adopt nutrition and fitness apps, ranging from having "decided to" but not yet begun to act (stage 2; nutrition: 6.88%, 70/1017; fitness: 9.23%, 95/1029) to being "disengaged" following previous adoption (stage 5; nutrition: 13.77%, 140/1017; fitness: 15.06%, 155/1029).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a behavior stage model approach to describe the process of adopting nutrition and fitness apps revealed motivational stage differences between nonusers (being "unengaged," having "decided not to act," having "decided to act," and being "disengaged"), which might contribute to a better understanding of the process of adopting mHealth apps and thus inform the future development of digital interventions. This study highlights that new user groups might be better reached by apps designed to address a more intuitive decision-making style.

Comparing perceived clarity of information on overdiagnosis used for breast and prostate cancer screening in England: an experimental survey

OBJECTIVES

'Overdiagnosis', detection of disease that would never have caused symptoms or death, is a public health concern due to possible psychological and physical harm but little is known about how best to explain it. This study evaluated public perceptions of widely used information on the concept to identify scope for improving communication methods.

DESIGN

Experimental survey carried out by a market research company via face-to-face computer-assisted interviews.

SETTING

Interviews took place in participants' homes.

PARTICIPANTS

2111 members of the general public in England aged 18-70 years began the survey; 1616 were eligible for analysis. National representativeness was sought via demographic quota sampling.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were allocated at random to receive a brief description of overdiagnosis derived from written information used by either the NHS Breast Screening Programme or the prostate cancer screening equivalent.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was how clear the information was perceived to be (extremely/very clear vs less clear). Other measures included previous exposure to screening information, decision-making styles and demographic characteristics (eg, education). Binary logistic regression was used to assess predictors of perceived clarity.

RESULTS

Overdiagnosis information from the BSP was more likely to be rated as more clear compared with the prostate screening equivalent (adjusted OR: 1.43, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.75; p=0.001). Participants were more likely to perceive the information as more clear if they had previously encountered similar information (OR: 1.77, 1.40 to 2.23; p<0.0005) or a screening leaflet (OR: 1.35, 1.04 to 1.74; p=0.024) or had a more 'rational' decision-making style (OR: 1.06, 1.02 to 1.11; p=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Overdiagnosis information from breast screening may be a useful template for communicating the concept more generally (eg, via organised campaigns). However, this information may be less well-suited to individuals who are less inclined to consider risks and benefits during decision-making.