Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29551327›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2018

Lay Beliefs About the Accuracy and Value of Cancer Screening.

Megan C Roberts, Rebecca A Ferrer, Katharine A Rendle, Sarah C Kobrin, Stephen H Taplin, Bradford W Hesse, William M P Klein

Open access · greenAbstract readAddress
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Preventive screening in women who have sex with women.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2021
    Article
  6. Revisiting Candidacy: What Might It Offer Cancer Prevention?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Cancer Worry and Fatalism at the Intersection of Race and Hearing Status.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Megan C RobertsThe National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland. Electronic address: megan.roberts@nih.gov.
Rebecca A FerrerThe National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland.
Katharine A RendleThe National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland.
Sarah C KobrinThe National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland.
Stephen H TaplinThe National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland.
Bradford W HesseThe National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland.
William M P KleinThe National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland.
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999NULL Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAppreciating the accuracy and value of cancer screening is essential to informed decision making about screening. This study's objectives were to (1) examine people's beliefs about the accuracy and value of cancer screening, and (2) determine whether sociodemographics, cancer beliefs, and shared decision making are associated with these beliefs.

methodsData from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey (cycle 4, August-November 2014) were used. Respondents were non-institutionalized adults (aged ≥18 years, n=3,677). Weighted generalized linear modeling was used to examine bivariate and multivariate associations between key covariates and beliefs about cancer screening (assessed by four-item scale and independently). Secondary analyses examined whether these beliefs were associated with self-reported cancer screening. Data were analyzed between 2016 and 2017.

resultsOnly 5.6% (n=189) of respondents answered all four cancer screening items correctly. Men, racial/ethnic minorities, and those with lower education and higher cancer fatalism were less likely to have accurate beliefs about cancer screening. However, those who reported shared decision making for colorectal cancer screening were more likely to know that "when a test finds something abnormal, more tests are needed to know if it is cancer" and "when a test finds something abnormal, it is [not] very likely to be cancer" (adjusted risk ratio=1.13, p<0.01, adjusted risk ratio=1.25, p<0.01). Beliefs were not associated with likelihood of past mammography or Pap testing.

conclusionsEducators, researchers, and clinicians should consider opportunities (e.g., through shared decision making) to improve the accuracy of individuals' beliefs about cancer screening.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultAgedEarly Detection of CancerEducational StatusFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatient Education as TopicSex FactorsUnited StatesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29551327
PMCPMC5911403
OpenAlexW2791907260

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.