ArticleNursing research
Understanding Cancer Worry Among Patients in a Community Clinic-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Intervention Study.
Article in Nursing research. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methodological Quality of PROMs in Psychosocial Consequences of Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.Patient related outcome measures · 2023Review
- Online Health Information Seeking and eHealth Literacy Among Spanish Language-Dominant Latino Adults Receiving Care in a Community Clinic: Secondary Analysis of Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Data.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) screening disparities, it is important to understand correlates of different types of cancer worry among ethnically diverse individuals.
objectivesThe current study examined the prevalence of three types of cancer worry (i.e., general cancer worry, CRC-specific worry, and worry about CRC test results) as well as sociodemographic and health-related predictors for each type of cancer worry.
methodsParticipants were aged 50-75, at average CRC risk, nonadherent to CRC screening guidelines, and enrolled in a randomized controlled trial to increase CRC screening. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire assessing sociodemographics, health beliefs, healthcare experiences, and three cancer worry measures. Associations between study variables were examined with separate univariate and multivariable logistic regression models.
resultsResponses from a total of 416 participants were used. Of these, 47% reported experiencing moderate-to-high levels of general cancer worry. Predictors of general cancer worry were salience and coherence (aOR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.0, 1.3]), perceived susceptibility (aOR = 1.2, 95% CI [1.1, 1.3), and social influence (aOR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.0, 0.1]). Fewer (23%) reported moderate-to-high levels of CRC-specific worry or CRC test worry (35%). Predictors of CRC worry were perceived susceptibility (aOR = 1.4, 95% CI [1.3, 1.6]) and social influence (aOR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.0, 1.2]); predictors of CRC test result worry were perceived susceptibility (aOR = 1.2, 95% CI [1.1, 1.3) and marital status (aOR = 2.0, 95% CI [1.1, 3.7] for married/partnered vs. single and aOR = 2.3, 95% CI [1.3, 4.1] for divorced/widowed vs. single). DISCUSSION: Perceived susceptibility consistently predicted the three types of cancer worry, whereas other predictors varied between cancer worry types and in magnitude of association. The three types of cancer worry were generally predicted by health beliefs, suggesting potential malleability. Future research should include multiple measures of cancer worry and clear definitions of how cancer worry is measured.
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.