ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015
How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think-aloud study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Effects of evidence-based strategies to reduce the socioeconomic gradient of uptake in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (ASCEND): four cluster-randomised controlled trials.Lancet (London, England) · 2016Trial
- The effect of a supplementary ('Gist-based') information leaflet on colorectal cancer knowledge and screening intention: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2015Trial
- The Role of Emotions in Health Literacy and Patient Education: Trends, Technologies, and Future Opportunities-A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- User appraisal of a booklet for advance care planning in multiple sclerosis: a multicenter, qualitative Italian study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Acceptability and optimisation of resources to support antidepressant cessation: a qualitative think-aloud study with patients in Australian primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Participant-guided development of bilingual genomic educational infographics for Electronic Medical Records and Genomics Phase IV study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- 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.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- Acceptability of a standalone written leaflet for the National Health Service for England Targeted Lung Health Check Programme: A concurrent, think-aloud study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening.BMC psychology · 2020Article
- How Do Women Interpret the NHS Information Leaflet about Cervical Cancer Screening?Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2019Article
- Web-Based Communication Strategies Designed to Improve Intention to Minimize Risk for Colorectal Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR cancer · 2018Article
- Negotiating Tensions Between Theory and Design in the Development of Mailings for People Recovering From Acute Coronary Syndrome.JMIR human factors · 2017Article
- Inequalities in cancer screening participation: examining differences in perceived benefits and barriers.Psycho-oncology · 2016Article
- Using Specialist Screening Practitioners (SSPs) to increase uptake of the Bowel Scope (Flexible Sigmoidoscopy) Screening Programme: a study protocol for a feasibility single-stage phase II trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2016Article
- ABCs or 123s? The independent contributions of literacy and numeracy skills on health task performance among older adults.Patient education and counseling · 2015Article
- Limited health literacy is a barrier to colorectal cancer screening in England: evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.Preventive medicine · 2014Article
- The development and testing of a brief ('gist-based') supplementary colorectal cancer screening information leaflet.Patient education and counseling · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme biennially invites individuals aged 60-74 to participate in screening. The booklet, 'Bowel Cancer Screening: The Facts' accompanies this invitation. Its primary aim is to inform potential participants about the aims, advantages and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening.
objectiveTo provide detailed commentary on how individuals process the information contained within 'The Facts' booklet. DESIGN, SETTING AND
participantsThis study comprised of 18 interviews with individuals aged 45-60 and used a 'think-aloud' paradigm in which participants read aloud the booklet. Participant utterances (verbal statements made in response to researcher-led prompts) were transcribed and analysed using a combination of content and thematic analysis.
resultsA total of 776 coded utterances were analysed (mean = 43.1 per person; range = 8-95). While overall comprehension was satisfactory, several problem areas were identified such as the use of complex unfamiliar terminology and the presentation of numerical information. Specific sections such as colonoscopy risk information evoked negative emotional responses. Participants made several suggestions for ways in which comprehension might be improved.
conclusionPublic perceptions of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme information materials indicated that specific aspects of the booklet were difficult to process. These materials may be an appropriate target to improve public understanding of the aims, benefits and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening. These findings will contribute to a broader NIHR-funded project that aims to design a supplementary 'gist-based' information leaflet suitable for low literacy populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.