Literature DB >> 20536535

Beliefs and beyond: what can we learn from qualitative studies of lay people's understandings of cancer risk?

Wendy L Lipworth1, Heather M Davey, Stacy M Carter, Claire Hooker, Wendy Hu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinicians and public health professionals are centrally concerned with mediating risk. However, people often resist the risk-related information that is communicated to them by experts, or have their own models of risk that conflict with expert views. Quantitative studies have clearly demonstrated the importance of health beliefs and various cognitive and emotional processes in shaping risk perception. More recently, a growing body of qualitative research has emerged, exploring lay conceptualizations, experiences and constructions of cancer risk. To date, this literature has not been synthesized.
OBJECTIVE: We report the findings of a synthesis of qualitative literature regarding the ways in which lay people construct and experience cancer risk.
DESIGN: We identified 87 articles and used the method of 'thematic synthesis' to identify and interpret key concepts from existing studies.
RESULTS: Eight analytic categories were developed: (i) perceptions of risk factors; (ii) process of risk perception; (iii) seeking control and taking responsibility (motivational factors); (iv) experiencing cancer directly; (v) constructing risk temporally; (vi) embodying risk; (vii) identifying with risk; and (viii) constructing risk in a social context.
CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative enquiry can provide us with a rich and nuanced picture of the ways in which people understand, experience and construct risk and how being 'at risk' is managed, and can assist us in our communication with both individual patients and populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20536535      PMCID: PMC5060527          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00601.x

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


  23 in total

1.  Personal theories of inheritance, coping strategies, risk perception and engagement in hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer families offered genetic testing.

Authors:  M McAllister
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.438

Review 2.  Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews.

Authors:  James Thomas; Angela Harden; Ann Oakley; Sandy Oliver; Katy Sutcliffe; Rebecca Rees; Ginny Brunton; Josephine Kavanagh
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-04-24

3.  Influence of traditional Chinese beliefs on cancer screening behaviour among Chinese-Australian women.

Authors:  Cannas Kwok; Gerard Sullivan
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.187

4.  Critically appraising qualitative research.

Authors:  Ayelet Kuper; Lorelei Lingard; Wendy Levinson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-08-07

5.  An introduction to reading and appraising qualitative research.

Authors:  Ayelet Kuper; Scott Reeves; Wendy Levinson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-08-07

6.  Embodied risk: my body, myself?

Authors:  A M Kavanagh; D H Broom
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Repositioning the patient: the implications of being 'at risk'.

Authors:  S Scott; L Prior; F Wood; J Gray
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Accommodating risk: responses to BRCA1/2 genetic testing of women who have had cancer.

Authors:  N Hallowell; C Foster; R Eeles; A Ardern-Jones; M Watson
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  Danger zones: risk perceptions of young women from families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Allison V Werner-Lin
Journal:  Fam Process       Date:  2007-09

10.  Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: lessons learnt.

Authors:  Salla Atkins; Simon Lewin; Helen Smith; Mark Engel; Atle Fretheim; Jimmy Volmink
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2008-04-16       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  19 in total

1.  Views of Low-Income Women of Color at Increased Risk for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Emily E Anderson; Silvia Tejada; Richard B Warnecke; Kent Hoskins
Journal:  Narrat Inq Bioeth       Date:  2018

2.  SI RLTD: Risk Scores and Decision Making: The Anatomy of a Decision to Reduce Breast Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Christine Holmberg; Mary Daly; Worta McCaskill-Stevens
Journal:  J Nurs Healthc Chronic Illn       Date:  2010-12

3.  Genetic and lifestyle causal beliefs about obesity and associated diseases among ethnically diverse patients: a structured interview study.

Authors:  S C Sanderson; M A Diefenbach; S A Streicher; E W Jabs; M Smirnoff; C R Horowitz; R Zinberg; C Clesca; L D Richardson
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 2.000

4.  'Worse than HIV' or 'not as serious as other diseases'? Conceptualization of cervical cancer among newly screened women in Zambia.

Authors:  Heather L White; Chishimba Mulambia; Moses Sinkala; Mulindi H Mwanahamuntu; Groesbeck P Parham; Linda Moneyham; Diane M Grimley; Eric Chamot
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2012-03-07       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Understanding the needs of women considering risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy.

Authors:  Carol Cherry; Mary Ropka; Jennifer Lyle; Laura Napolitano; Mary B Daly
Journal:  Cancer Nurs       Date:  2013 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.592

6.  A Cross-Sectional Study about Knowledge, Awareness and Perception of Risk Factors for Cancer among Cancer-Patients Relatives and Healthy Adults in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

Authors:  Dung X Pham; Tien T T Pham; Thang N Pham; Tung D Bui
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2021-01-01

7.  A qualitative exploration of Malaysian cancer patients' perspectives on cancer and its treatment.

Authors:  Maryam Farooqui; Mohamed A Hassali; Aishah K Shatar; Asrul A Shafie; Tan B Seang; Muhammad A Farooqui
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ.

Authors:  Allison Tong; Kate Flemming; Elizabeth McInnes; Sandy Oliver; Jonathan Craig
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  A cluster-randomised, parallel group, controlled intervention study of genetic prostate cancer risk assessment and use of PSA tests in general practice--the ProCaRis study: study protocol.

Authors:  Pia Kirkegaard; Peter Vedsted; Adrian Edwards; Morten Fenger-Grøn; Flemming Bro
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Constructing a questionnaire for assessment of awareness and acceptance of diversity in healthcare institutions.

Authors:  Azita Emami; Jalal Safipour
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-04-22       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.