Literature DB >> 10854455

New directions for risk communication research: a discussion with additional suggestions.

A C Marcus1.   

Abstract

The papers by Huerta and Macario and Kreuter share the theme of suggesting new directions for risk communication research in cancer prevention and control. Huerta and Macario remind us once again that sociocultural factors must be considered when conducting risk communication research on underserved populations. Of special note is their recommendation to target the family, which could introduce a compelling new chapter in risk communication research in cancer prevention and control. In contrast, Kreuter challenges us to consider multiple cancer risks and risk-reducing behaviors in our research and provides a provocative framework for achieving this goal. Given this common theme and the need to position specific recommendations within the larger context of other competing research questions, this paper also highlights several additional recommendations for future research. These recommendations include the following: more research on risk presentation; establishing guidelines for measuring risk; additional research testing strategies to de-bias optimistic and pessimistic perceptions of risk and evaluating risk communication as a strategy for behavior change; more research investigating the sociology of risk communication, with a special emphasis on the family as the unit of investigation; and, finally, more research that specifically targets underserved populations in diverse community settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10854455     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a024205

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr        ISSN: 1052-6773


  5 in total

Review 1.  Research issues in genetic testing of adolescents for obesity.

Authors:  Mary E Segal; Pamela Sankar; Danielle R Reed
Journal:  Nutr Rev       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 7.110

2.  "Why take it if you don't have anything?" breast cancer risk perceptions and prevention choices at a public hospital.

Authors:  Talya Salant; Pamela S Ganschow; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Diane S Lauderdale
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Perceived intrafamily melanoma risk communication.

Authors:  Lois J Loescher; Janice D Crist; Leilani A C L Siaki
Journal:  Cancer Nurs       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.592

4.  Predictors of decision making in families at risk for inherited breast/ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Suzanne Mellon; James Janisse; Robin Gold; Michelle Cichon; Lisa Berry-Bobovski; Michael A Tainsky; Michael S Simon
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 4.267

5.  Screening in the dark: ethical considerations of providing screening tests to individuals when evidence is insufficient to support screening populations.

Authors:  Ingrid M Burger; Nancy E Kass
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 11.229

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.