Literature DB >> 15040792

Consumer information materials for diagnostic breast tests: women's views on information and their understanding of test results.

Heather M Davey1, Jacqueline Lim, Phyllis N Butow, Alexandra L Barratt, Nehmat Houssami, Roberta Higginson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To explore women's views on diagnostic breast test information and elicit their preferences for this information.
DESIGN: In-depth, face-to-face interview. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-seven women who had previously participated in a population-based telephone survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Qualitative thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Analysis of interview transcripts revealed information about: (1) the wide range of information participants wanted about diagnostic mammography; (2) general reactions to diagnostic breast test information, including positive and negative reactions, views of test accuracy information and perceived influences on information preferences; (3) preferences for information content and presentation including the need for written information, the meaning of statistical information, different views on a simple presentation style, and variation in preferences; and (4) women's understanding of diagnostic test results.
CONCLUSION: Women want a range of information about diagnostic mammography, which is relevant at different times in the decision-making and testing process. Many women have difficulty interpreting test results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 15040792      PMCID: PMC5060199          DOI: 10.1046/j.1369-7625.2003.00227.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  21 in total

1.  Participation of patients in decisions about treatment for cancer.

Authors:  L Fallowfield
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-11-17

2.  Information about tests for breast cancer: what are we telling people?

Authors:  Emily Croft; Alexandra Barratt; Phyllis Butow
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 0.493

3.  Medical tests: women's reported and preferred decision-making roles and preferences for information on benefits, side-effects and false results.

Authors:  Heather M Davey; Alexandra L Barratt; Elizabeth Davey; Phyllis N Butow; Sally Redman; Nehmat Houssami; Glenn P Salkeld
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough?

Authors:  A Coulter; V Entwistle; D Gilbert
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-01-30

Review 5.  Screening for prostate cancer. American College of Physicians.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1997-03-15       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 6.  How to prepare cancer patients for potentially threatening medical procedures: consensus guidelines. NSW Cancer Council Cancer Education Research Program.

Authors:  M J Schofield; R Sanson-Fisher
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.037

7.  Quantifying the meanings of words.

Authors:  W O Robertson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1983-05-20       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Randomised trial of the psychological effect of information about oral cancer in primary care settings.

Authors:  G M Humphris; R S Ireland; E A Field
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 5.337

9.  Practical issues in assisting shared decision-making.

Authors:  Deb Feldman-Stewart; Michael D. Brundage; Beth A. McConnell; William J. MacKillop
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  The accuracy of patients' judgments of disease probability and test sensitivity and specificity.

Authors:  R M Hamm; S L Smith
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 0.493

View more
  11 in total

1.  "What does this mean?" How Web-based consumer health information fails to support information seeking in the pursuit of informed consent for screening test decisions.

Authors:  Jacquelyn Burkell; D Grant Campbell
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2005-07

2.  Patient experiences of MR colonography and colonoscopy: a qualitative study.

Authors:  R Hafeez; C V Wagner; S Smith; P Boulos; S Halligan; S Bloom; S A Taylor
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  What Australian women want and when they want it: cervical screening testing preferences, decision-making styles and information needs.

Authors:  Mbathio Dieng; Lyndal Trevena; Robin M Turner; Monika Wadolowski; Kirsten McCaffery
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-07-04       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Living in the context of poverty and trajectories of breast cancer worry, knowledge, and perceived risk after a breast cancer risk education session.

Authors:  Suzanne Bartle-Haring
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2010-08-05

5.  A model of the influence of false-positive mammography screening results on subsequent screening.

Authors:  Jessica T Defrank; Noel Brewer
Journal:  Health Psychol Rev       Date:  2010

6.  Predicting the use of individualized risk assessment for breast cancer.

Authors:  Suzanne Bartle-Haring; Paula Toviessi; Heather Katafiasz
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr

7.  Choosing between CT colonography and colonoscopy in the diagnostic context: a qualitative study of influences on patient preferences.

Authors:  Christian von Wagner; Steve Halligan; Wendy S Atkin; Richard J Lilford; Dion Morton; Jane Wardle
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Selective information seeking: can consumers' avoidance of evidence-based information on colorectal cancer screening be explained by the theory of cognitive dissonance?

Authors:  Anke Steckelberg; Jürgen Kasper; Ingrid Mühlhauser
Journal:  Ger Med Sci       Date:  2007-08-27

9.  A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review.

Authors:  Zhivko Zhelev; Ruth Garside; Christopher Hyde
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2013-05-16

10.  The role of information search in seeking alternative treatment for back pain: a qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Hoda McClymont; Jeff Gow; Chad Perry
Journal:  Chiropr Man Therap       Date:  2014-04-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.