Literature DB >> 12244644

Message framing and mammography screening: a theory-driven intervention.

Lila J Finney1, Ronald J Iannotti.   

Abstract

Although the rising incidence of breast cancer has prompted a surge of intervention strategies aimed at increasing women's use of mammography screening, the majority of patient-directed interventions have not been driven by relevant theoretical work on persuasive health communication. The authors evaluated an intervention derived from prospect theory that was designed to increase women's adherence to recommendations for annual mammography screening. They sent 1 of 3 reminder letters (positive frame, negative frame, or standard hospital prompt) to 929 randomly selected women who were due for mammography screening and had been identified as having either a positive or negative family history of breast cancer. The primary hypothesis that women with a positive history would be more responsive to negatively framed messages, whereas women with a negative history would be more responsive to positively framed letters, was not confirmed. The lack of support for predictions derived from prospect theory raises important questions about the generalizability of laboratory research to natural settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12244644     DOI: 10.1080/08964280209596393

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Med        ISSN: 0896-4289            Impact factor:   3.104


  10 in total

Review 1.  Interventions to promote repeat breast cancer screening with mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Amy McQueen; Jasmin A Tiro; Deborah J del Junco
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Qualitative study to explore Prospect Theory and message framing and diet and cancer prevention-related issues among African American adolescents.

Authors:  Jessie A Satia; Jameta Barlow; Janelle Armstrong-Brown; Joanne L Watters
Journal:  Cancer Nurs       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.592

3.  How to reduce the effect of framing on messages about health.

Authors:  Rocio Garcia-Retamero; Mirta Galesic
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-08-25       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Nicotine vaccines: will smokers take a shot at quitting?

Authors:  Amy E Leader; Caryn Lerman; Joseph N Cappella
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2010-02-25       Impact factor: 4.244

5.  Cancer perceptions: implications from the 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey.

Authors:  Marc A Kowalkowski; Stacey L Hart; Xianglin L Du; Sarah Baraniuk; David M Latini
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 4.442

6.  Perceived susceptibility to breast cancer moderates the effect of gain- and loss-framed messages on use of screening mammography.

Authors:  Kristel M Gallagher; John A Updegraff; Alexander J Rothman; Linda Sims
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.267

7.  Gain- and Loss-Frame Sun Safety Messages and Psychological Reactance of Adolescents.

Authors:  Hyunyi Cho; Laura Sands
Journal:  Commun Res Rep       Date:  2011-10-25

8.  Effects of information framing on human papillomavirus vaccination.

Authors:  Amy E Leader; Judith L Weiner; Bridget J Kelly; Robert C Hornik; Joseph N Cappella
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.681

9.  The effects of HIV testing advocacy messages on test acceptance: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Monica L Kasting; Anthony D Cox; Dena Cox; Kenneth H Fife; Barry P Katz; Gregory D Zimet
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 8.775

10.  A triple test for behavioral economics models and public health policy.

Authors:  Ryota Nakamura; Marc Suhrcke; Daniel John Zizzo
Journal:  Theory Decis       Date:  2017-07-18
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.