ArticlePloS one2025
The impact of temporal framing of breast cancer risk on perceptions of and motivations to engage with information about early diagnosis: Evidence from an online experiment.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the application of Construal Level Theory (CLT) to grasp how individuals perceive and respond to breast cancer risk in both near and distant future scenarios. Employing a two-stage methodology, we initially conducted a preliminary survey with 201 women aged 40 to 50, evaluating their perceptions of various phrasings of breast cancer risk information, including '1 in x', 'x% of', and 'x-y% probability'. Subsequently, an online experiment involving 1052 women in the same age group explored the influence of temporal framing on perceived risk and intentions for breast self-checks. We selected the most understandable, imaginable, and motivational phrasing from the preliminary survey for the experiment. The participants were divided into two groups: near-future framing (N = 526) and distant-future framing of developing breast cancer (N = 526). Study 1 revealed that women found the '1 in x' framing to be the easiest to understand, imagine, and most motivational. However, the subsequent experiment (Study 2) did not find any significant effects of temporal framing on women's perceived risk of developing breast cancer, perceived importance of self-checks, intention to conduct self-checks, or interest in learning more about self-checks. Nonetheless, it was noteworthy that individuals exposed to near-future framing perceived their risk as closer in time compared to those presented with distant-future framing (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.15-1.77 p = 0.001; aOR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.14-1.76; p = 0.002). In conclusion, our study found that temporal distance of breast cancer risk doesn't affect risk perception or information-seeking behaviour, suggesting a focus on clear, motivational risk communication rather than temporal framing alone.
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.