Literature DB >> 17922166

Frustrated and confused: the American public rates its cancer-related information-seeking experiences.

Neeraj K Arora1, Bradford W Hesse, Barbara K Rimer, K Viswanath, Marla L Clayman, Robert T Croyle.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ensuring access to high-quality cancer-related information is important for the success of cancer prevention and control efforts.
OBJECTIVE: We conducted a population-based assessment of the barriers faced by people searching for cancer information.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional data from the National Cancer Institute's 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey. PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of individuals in the USA (n = 6,369). MEASUREMENTS: We assessed whether respondents had ever sought cancer-related information and examined ratings of their information-seeking experiences and beliefs regarding causes of cancer and its prevention. Linear and logistic regression models were estimated to determine predictors of negative experiences and associations between experiences and cancer beliefs.
RESULTS: Nearly one half (44.9%) of Americans had searched for cancer information. Many reported negative experiences, including the search process requiring a lot of effort (47.7%), expressing frustration (41.3%), and concerns about the quality of the information found (57.7%). Respondents lacking health insurance or a high school education experienced the greatest difficulty. Compared to those reporting the most positive experiences, information seekers reporting more negative experiences were more likely to report that almost everything caused cancer [odds ratio (OR) 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5-2.6], that not much can be done to prevent cancer (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.9-3.8), and that it is hard to know which cancer prevention recommendations to follow (OR 3.2, 95% CI 2.3-4.5).
CONCLUSIONS: While a significant proportion of the American public searches for cancer information, suboptimal experiences are common. Facilitation of information seeking will be critical for promoting informed decision making in cancer prevention and control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17922166      PMCID: PMC2359461          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-007-0406-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  22 in total

Review 1.  Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art.

Authors:  R J Cline; K M Haynes
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2001-12

2.  Medscape's response to the Institute of Medicine Report: Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century.

Authors:  M Leavitt
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2001-03-05

3.  Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango).

Authors:  C Charles; A Gafni; T Whelan
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Assessing, controlling, and assuring the quality of medical information on the Internet: Caveant lector et viewor--Let the reader and viewer beware.

Authors:  W M Silberg; G D Lundberg; R A Musacchio
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-04-16       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Patient preferences for medical decision making: who really wants to participate?

Authors:  N K Arora; C A McHorney
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  The Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS): development, design, and dissemination.

Authors:  David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Bradford W Hesse; Robert T Croyle; Gordon Willis; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; K V Viswanath; Neil Weinstein; Sara Alden
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct

7.  Seeking health care information: most consumers still on the sidelines.

Authors:  Ha T Tu; J Lee Hargraves
Journal:  Issue Brief Cent Stud Health Syst Change       Date:  2003-03

Review 8.  Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening?

Authors:  Barbara K Rimer; Peter A Briss; Paula K Zeller; Evelyn C Y Chan; Steven H Woolf
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Consequences of declining survey response rates for smoking prevalence estimates.

Authors:  Lois Biener; Catherine A Garrett; Elizabeth A Gilpin; Anthony M Roman; Douglas B Currivan
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 10.  Patient characteristics as predictors of primary health care preferences: a systematic literature analysis.

Authors:  Hans Peter Jung; Cor Baerveldt; Frede Olesen; Richard Grol; Michel Wensing
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.377

View more
  59 in total

1.  Seeking cancer-related information from media and family/friends increases fruit and vegetable consumption among cancer patients.

Authors:  Nehama Lewis; Lourdes S Martinez; Derek R Freres; J Sanford Schwartz; Katrina Armstrong; Stacy W Gray; Taressa Fraze; Rebekah H Nagler; Angel Bourgoin; Robert C Hornik
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2011-09-20

2.  A qualitative study of cancer information seeking among English-as-a-second-Language older Chinese immigrant women to canada: sources, barriers, and strategies.

Authors:  Laura Todd; Laurie Hoffman-Goetz
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  Health-related Google searches performed by parents of pediatric oncology patients.

Authors:  Charles A Phillips; Alaina Hunt; Mikaela Salvesen-Quinn; Jorge Guerra; Marilyn M Schapira; L Charles Bailey; Raina M Merchant
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2019-05-09       Impact factor: 3.167

4.  Clarification of issues raised in the editorial "A new age for cancer information seeking: are we better off now?".

Authors:  Neeraj K Arora
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Navigating the cancer information environment: The reciprocal relationship between patient-clinician information engagement and information seeking from nonmedical sources.

Authors:  Mihaela Moldovan-Johnson; Andy S L Tan; Robert C Hornik
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2013-12-20

6.  Trust in national health information sources in the United States: comparing predictors and levels of trust across three health domains.

Authors:  Emily B Peterson; Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou; Dannielle E Kelley; Brad Hesse
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 3.046

7.  How Are Information Seeking, Scanning, and Processing Related to Beliefs About the Roles of Genetics and Behavior in Cancer Causation?

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Courtney Wheeler; Jada G Hamilton
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2016-09-23

8.  Patient preference and decision-making for initiating metastatic colorectal cancer medical treatment.

Authors:  Alex Z Fu; Kristi D Graves; Roxanne E Jensen; John L Marshall; Margaret Formoso; Arnold L Potosky
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 4.553

9.  Impact of delivery models on understanding genomic risk for type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  S B Haga; W T Barry; R Mills; L Svetkey; S Suchindran; H F Willard; G S Ginsburg
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 10.  Cancer Information Seeking and Cancer-Related Health Outcomes: A Scoping Review of the Health Information National Trends Survey Literature.

Authors:  Lisa T Wigfall; Daniela B Friedman
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2016-07-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.