Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26280754›Full record

ArticleJournal of behavioral medicine2016

Deliberative and intuitive risk perceptions as predictors of colorectal cancer screening over time.

Jennifer L Hay, Marcel Ramos, Yuelin Li, Susan Holland, Debra Brennessel, M Margaret Kemeny

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of behavioral medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A Model-Based Meta-Analysis of Willingness to Participate in Cancer Screening.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Measuring Cigarette Smoking Risk Perceptions.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jennifer L HayDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, Seventh Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA. hayj@mskcc.org.
Marcel RamosDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, Seventh Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
Yuelin LiDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, Seventh Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
Susan HollandDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, Seventh Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
Debra BrennesselMount Sinai Medical Center, Queens Hospital Center, New York, NY, 11432, USA.
M Margaret KemenyMount Sinai Medical Center, Queens Hospital Center, New York, NY, 11432, USA.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Perception of Gene-Environment Cancer Risks in MelanomaK07CA098106 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI HAY, JENNIFER L · 2003 to 2007
$672k
Cancer Risks Beliefs & ScreeningR21CA133376 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI HAY, JENNIFER L · 2009 to 2010
$457k
NCI NIH HHS CA098106NCI NIH HHS CA133376NCI NIH HHS K07 CA098106NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R21 CA133376
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer risk perceptions may involve intuitions-including both affect as well as gut-level thoughts about risk-and deliberative risk magnitudes. Yet, little research has examined the potentially diverse relations between risk perceptions and behavior across time. A highly diverse primary care sample (N = 544, aged ≥50) was utilized to compare how deliberative and intuitive perceptions of risk relate to chart-confirmed colorectal cancer screening at cross-sectional and prospective time points. At baseline, deliberative and intuitive risk perceptions were negatively associated with chart-confirmed colorectal cancer screening adherence in bivariable but not multivariable analyses. Among those who were non-adherent with colorectal cancer screening at baseline, deliberative and intuitive risk perceptions were positively associated with prospective uptake of chart-confirmed colorectal cancer screening adherence at 12-months in bivariable analyses; only deliberative risk perceptions remained significant in the multivariable model. This study indicates that diverse risk perceptions are differentially important for screening at different time points.

Indexed as

PerceptionAgedAged, 80 and overColorectal NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentCancer risk perceptionsColorectal cancer screeningDiverse populationsPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID26280754
PMCPMC4724274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.