Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31080706›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2019

Knowledge, attitudes, and worries among different health literacy groups before receiving first invitation to colorectal cancer screening: Cross-sectional study.

Pernille Gabel, Mette Bach Larsen, Adrian Edwards, Pia Kirkegaard, Berit Andersen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Role of Health Literacy among Outpatient Caregivers during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  15. Colorectal cancer screening in Uruguay: current assessment and roadmap for the future.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The call for a strategic framework to improve cancer literacy in Europe.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2020
    Article
  19. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Pernille GabelDepartment of Public Health Programmes, Randers Regional Hospital, Denmark.
Mette Bach LarsenDepartment of Public Health Programmes, Randers Regional Hospital, Denmark.
Adrian EdwardsDepartment of Public Health Programmes, Randers Regional Hospital, Denmark.
Pia KirkegaardDepartment of Public Health Programmes, Randers Regional Hospital, Denmark.
Berit AndersenDepartment of Public Health Programmes, Randers Regional Hospital, Denmark.
Regional Hospital Randers · DKAarhus University · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer screening uptake is associated with knowledge, attitudes and worries about screening. People with higher levels of health literacy usually have higher screening-related knowledge, but its association with attitudes and worries is sparsely described.The aim of this study was to describe knowledge, attitudes, and worries about colorectal cancer screening among unscreened citizens, and to estimate the association between these and health literacy.

methodsIn a cross-sectional study 10,030 53-74 year-old Central Denmark Region citizens received a questionnaire assessing knowledge, attitudes, worry and health literacy. Socioeconomic and -demographic data were linked from Statistics Denmark after data collection.

resultsIn total, 7142 (71.2%) questionnaires were completed. A good general level of knowledge was observed (4.91 and 5.13 out of 7 for men and women, respectively). Citizens tended to be positive towards screening (21.4 and 21.3 on a 4-28 range scale for men and women respectively), and showed low levels of worries (8.8 and 9.09 on a 3-15 range scale for men and women respectively). Knowledge decreased and worries increased with lower levels of health literacy. Further, attitudes tended to be more positive with higher levels of health literacy.

conclusionsIn general, citizens tend to have good knowledge, positive attitudes and few worries about colorectal cancer screening. People with lower health literacy could benefit from targeted interventions that address knowledge and worries about screening to support informed decision making.

Indexed as

Colorectal neoplasmsCross-sectional studiesEducational statusHealth knowledge, attitudes, practiceHealth literacyMass screeningPatient participationSocioeconomic factors

Identifiers

PMID31080706
PMCPMC6506556
OpenAlexW2940611762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.