OBJECTIVE: This secondary data analysis was conducted to evaluate the applicability of the Risk Reappraisal Hypothesis, which has been proposed to explain the influence of performing a health behavior on perceived risk. Data were collected in the context of a randomized trial, which found that an individually tailored, multicomponent intervention was successful in increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among first-degree relatives of CRC cases. METHOD: The ethnically diverse study sample (N = 841; 29% Latino, 21% African American, 20% Asian) consisted of adult siblings and children (40-80 years) of CRC cases, identified through the California Cancer Registry. Data were collected at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Changes in self-reported risk perception (perceived likelihood of developing CRC) were examined over the study period in relation to study condition and screening status. RESULTS: Greater increases in perceived risk were observed among intervention versus control-group participants over the study period, but increases were limited to intervention participants who had not been screened. We also examined trajectories of perceived risk in relation to timing of screening receipt (e.g., before 6 months, 6-12 months, never). Continued upward shifts in risk were observed during the study period among intervention participants not screened during the study. In contrast, participants screened by 6 months displayed a reduction or leveling off in perceived risk between 6- and 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: Results provide support for the applicability of the Risk Reappraisal Hypothesis within a high-risk sample enrolled in a CRC screening promotion trial. Future research is needed to explore the impact of short-term risk reductions on future CRC screening behavior.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: This secondary data analysis was conducted to evaluate the applicability of the Risk Reappraisal Hypothesis, which has been proposed to explain the influence of performing a health behavior on perceived risk. Data were collected in the context of a randomized trial, which found that an individually tailored, multicomponent intervention was successful in increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among first-degree relatives of CRC cases. METHOD: The ethnically diverse study sample (N = 841; 29% Latino, 21% African American, 20% Asian) consisted of adult siblings and children (40-80 years) of CRC cases, identified through the California Cancer Registry. Data were collected at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Changes in self-reported risk perception (perceived likelihood of developing CRC) were examined over the study period in relation to study condition and screening status. RESULTS: Greater increases in perceived risk were observed among intervention versus control-group participants over the study period, but increases were limited to intervention participants who had not been screened. We also examined trajectories of perceived risk in relation to timing of screening receipt (e.g., before 6 months, 6-12 months, never). Continued upward shifts in risk were observed during the study period among intervention participants not screened during the study. In contrast, participants screened by 6 months displayed a reduction or leveling off in perceived risk between 6- and 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: Results provide support for the applicability of the Risk Reappraisal Hypothesis within a high-risk sample enrolled in a CRC screening promotion trial. Future research is needed to explore the impact of short-term risk reductions on future CRC screening behavior.
Authors: Eveline M A Bleiker; Fred H Menko; Babs G Taal; Irma Kluijt; Lidwina D V Wever; Miranda A Gerritsma; Hans F A Vasen; Neil K Aaronson Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Ronald E Myers; Randa Sifri; Terry Hyslop; Michael Rosenthal; Sally W Vernon; James Cocroft; Thomas Wolf; Jocelyn Andrel; Richard Wender Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Sue E Kim; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Sabrina Wong; Steve Gregorich; George F Sawaya; Judith M E Walsh; Celia P Kaplan Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2008-04-14
Authors: Susan M Rawl; Victoria L Champion; Linda L Scott; Honghong Zhou; Patrick Monahan; Yan Ding; Patrick Loehrer; Celette Sugg Skinner Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2008-03-04
Authors: Stephanie H Ward; Karen Lin; Brian Meyer; Sarah B Bass; Lalitha Parameswaran; Thomas F Gordon; Sheryl Burt Ruzek Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 2.739
Authors: Anthony Jerant; Richard L Kravitz; Nancy Sohler; Kevin Fiscella; Raquel L Romero; Bennett Parnes; Daniel J Tancredi; Sergio Aguilar-Gaxiola; Christina Slee; Simon Dvorak; Charles Turner; Andrew Hudnut; Francisco Prieto; Peter Franks Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2014 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166