Trial reportInternational journal of behavioral medicine2023
Psychosocial Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Screening Intention: An Experiment on the Invitation Letter.
Trial report in International journal of behavioral medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Italy, attendance rates for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening are suboptimal. The present work analysed cognitive and emotional predictors of CRC screening intention and tested an intervention on a real invitation letter to improve CRC screening intention, both directly and in interaction with the predictors of our model.
methodsOur model included variables from the theory of planned behaviour and the emotional barriers to bowel screening scale. We applied six changes to an invitation letter used in Italy to avoid the repetition of words like 'faeces', 'blood', or 'occult' and reduce the prompting of disgust. The 228 participants were randomly assigned to a between-participants design (original letter vs. manipulated letter).
resultsDisgust hindered CRC screening intention, while embarrassment, fear, and subjective norms (i.e., perception of the social pressures to attend CRC screening) were not associated with intention to screen. More positive attitudes towards CRC screening were associated with a higher intention to screen. The positive association between perceived behavioural control and CRC screening intention was stronger for participants who read the letter with fewer (vs. more) references to bodily waste. Letter manipulation did not affect intention to screen.
conclusionsThe disgust associated with faecal matter is a critical factor in determining CRC screening attendance, and it should be acknowledged as such in public policies. Until new screening tests avoiding the activation of this emotional reaction are concretely available, public campaigns should improve CRC screening participation by boosting both positive attitudes towards screening and patients' perceived behavioural control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36515798What 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.