ArticleBMC public health2024
Canadians' knowledge of cancer risk factors and belief in cancer myths.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Consumption of Red Versus White Wine and Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.Nutrients · 2025Pooled it
- Understanding young adults' sun safety practices in the workplace.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Awareness of the mythical causes of cancer in central Uganda: a community cross-sectional survey.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Article
- Sunscreen is overwhelmingly promoted on TikTok, but content with misinformation exhibits proportionally high levels of audience interaction.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Mind the gaps and educational disparities in awareness of cancer risk factors: a cross-sectional study amongst the general public in Sweden.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Disparity in cancer literacy by socioeconomic status.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Testing the effects of segmented crowdsource-selected messages to improve intentions to follow colorectal cancer screening recommendations: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Cancer prevention in Germany: awareness, beliefs, and information-seeking behaviors in a population-based survey.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Understanding real and mythical cancer risk factors: Insights from a university-based study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Socio-Economic Inequalities in Beliefs About Cancer and its Causes: Evidence From two Population Surveys.Psycho-oncology · 2024Article
- Beliefs on Causes of Cancer in the General Population, and the Association With Risk Perception and Lifestyle in a Multiethnic Setting.JCO global oncology · 2024Article
- A cross-sectional assessment of the influence of information sources about substance use in adolescents' tobacco prevalence.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Shooting for the Moon: Can We Cut Cancer Mortality in Canada By 50% By 2050?Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany untrue statements about cancer prevention and risks are circulating. The objective of this study was to assess Canadians' awareness of known cancer risk factors and cancer myths (untruths or statements that are not completely true), and to explore how awareness may vary by sociodemographic and cognitive factors.
methodsCancer myths were identified by conducting scans of published, grey literature, and social media. Intuitive-analytic thinking disposition scores included were actively open- and close-minded thinking, as well as preference for intuitive and effortful thinking. A survey was administered online to participants aged 18 years and older through Prolific. Results were summarized descriptively and analyzed using chi-square tests, as well as Spearman rank and Pearson correlations.
resultsResponses from 734 Canadians were received. Participants were better at identifying known cancer risk factors (70% of known risks) compared to cancer myths (49%). Bivariate analyses showed differential awareness of known cancer risk factors (p < 0.05) by population density and income, cancer myths by province, and for both by ethnicity, age, and all thinking disposition scores. Active open-minded thinking and preference for effortful thinking were associated with greater discernment. Tobacco-related risk factors were well-identified (> 90% correctly identified), but recognition of other known risk factors was poor (as low as 23% for low vegetable and fruit intake). Mythical cancer risk factors with high support were consuming additives (61%), feeling stressed (52%), and consuming artificial sweeteners (49%). High uncertainty of causation was observed for glyphosate (66% neither agreed or disagreed). For factors that reduce cancer risk, reasonable awareness was observed for HPV vaccination (60%), but there was a high prevalence in cancer myths, particularly that consuming antioxidants (65%) and organic foods (45%) are protective, and some uncertainty whether drinking red wine (41%), consuming vitamins (32%), and smoking cannabis (30%) reduces cancer risk.
conclusionsWhile Canadians were able to identify tobacco-related cancer risk factors, many myths were believed and numerous risk factors were not recognized. Cancer myths can be harmful in themselves and can detract the public's attention from and action on established risk factors.
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.