ArticleAmerican journal of men's health2017
Thinking Style as a Predictor of Men's Participation in Cancer Screening.
Article in American journal of men's health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patterns of Care and Treatment Outcomes Among Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Backgrounds: A Scoping Review.Current oncology reports · 2025Article
- Preference for Deliberation and Perceived Usefulness of Standard- and Narrative-Style Leaflet Designs: Implications for Equitable Cancer-Screening Communication.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Men's participation in cancer screening may be influenced by their thinking style. Men's need for cognition (NFC) and faith in intuition were measured to explore whether they varied by demographic variables or predicted screening behavior. Australian males ( n = 585, aged 50-74 years) completed surveys about past screening and were subsequently offered mailed fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs). Demographic predictors included age, socioeconomic status, educational attainment, and language spoken at home. The screening behaviors were self-reported prostate cancer screening (prostate-specific antigen testing and digital rectal examinations [DREs]), and colorectal cancer screening (self-reported FOBT participation and recorded uptake of the FOBT offer). Analysis comprised principal component analysis and structural equation modelling. NFC was positively related to demographic variables education, socioeconomic status, and speaking English at home. Faith in intuition was negatively related to educational attainment. NFC predicted variance in self-reported DRE participation ( r = .11, p = .016). No other relationships with thinking style were statistically significant. The relationship of NFC to DRE participation may reflect the way certain attributes of this screening method are processed, or alternatively, it may reflect willingness to report participation. The relationship of thinking style to a range of healthy behaviors should be further explored.
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.