Lisa Carter-Harris1, James E Slaven, Patrick Monohan, Susan M Rawl. 1. Author Affiliations: Indiana University School of Nursing (Drs Carter-Harris and Rawl); and Indiana University School of Medicine, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics (Mr Slaven and Dr Monahan), Indianapolis, Indiana.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening is a recent recommendation for long-term smokers. Understanding individual health beliefs about screening is a critical component in future efforts to facilitate patient-provider conversations about screening participation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the development and psychometric testing of 4 new scales to measure lung cancer screening health beliefs (perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, self-efficacy). METHODS: In phase I, 4 scales were developed from extensive literature review, item modification from existing Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales, focus groups with long-term smokers, and evaluation/feedback from a panel of 10 content experts. In phase II, we conducted a survey of 497 long-term smokers to assess the final scales' reliability and validity. RESULTS: Phase I: content validity was established with the content expert panel. Phase II: internal consistency reliability of the scales was supported with Cronbach's α's ranging from .88 to .92. Construct validity was established with confirmatory factor analysis and testing for differences between screeners and nonscreeners in theoretically proposed directions. CONCLUSIONS: Initial testing supports the scales are valid and reliable. These new scales can help investigators identify long-term smokers more likely to screen for lung cancer and are useful for the development and testing of behavioral interventions regarding lung cancer screening. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Development of effective interventions to enhance shared decision making about lung cancer screening between patients and providers must first identify factors influencing the individual's screening participation. Future efforts facilitating patient-provider conversations are better informed by understanding the perspective of the individual making the decision.
BACKGROUND:Lung cancer screening is a recent recommendation for long-term smokers. Understanding individual health beliefs about screening is a critical component in future efforts to facilitate patient-provider conversations about screening participation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the development and psychometric testing of 4 new scales to measure lung cancer screening health beliefs (perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, self-efficacy). METHODS: In phase I, 4 scales were developed from extensive literature review, item modification from existing Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales, focus groups with long-term smokers, and evaluation/feedback from a panel of 10 content experts. In phase II, we conducted a survey of 497 long-term smokers to assess the final scales' reliability and validity. RESULTS: Phase I: content validity was established with the content expert panel. Phase II: internal consistency reliability of the scales was supported with Cronbach's α's ranging from .88 to .92. Construct validity was established with confirmatory factor analysis and testing for differences between screeners and nonscreeners in theoretically proposed directions. CONCLUSIONS: Initial testing supports the scales are valid and reliable. These new scales can help investigators identify long-term smokers more likely to screen for lung cancer and are useful for the development and testing of behavioral interventions regarding lung cancer screening. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Development of effective interventions to enhance shared decision making about lung cancer screening between patients and providers must first identify factors influencing the individual's screening participation. Future efforts facilitating patient-provider conversations are better informed by understanding the perspective of the individual making the decision.
Authors: María E Fernández; Lara S Savas; Katherine M Wilson; Theresa L Byrd; John Atkinson; Isabel Torres-Vigil; Sally W Vernon Journal: Health Educ Behav Date: 2014-04-30
Authors: Sirisha Jonnalagadda; Cara Bergamo; Jenny J Lin; Linda Lurslurchachai; Michael Diefenbach; Cardinale Smith; Judith E Nelson; Juan P Wisnivesky Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2012-06-06 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Lisa Carter-Harris; James E Slaven; Patrick O Monahan; Claire Burke Draucker; Emilee Vode; Susan M Rawl Journal: J Med Screen Date: 2019-09-24 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: John Monu; Matthew Triplette; Douglas E Wood; Erika M Wolff; Danielle C Lavallee; David R Flum; Farhood Farjah Journal: Chest Date: 2020-02-07 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Lori C Sakoda; Melanie A Meyer; Neetu Chawla; Michael A Sanchez; Maruta A Blatchins; Sundeep Nayak; Karen San; Gary K Zin; George Minowada Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Dan J Raz; Geena Wu; Rebecca A Nelson; Virginia Sun; Su Wu; Angel Alem; Eric C Haupt; Mohamed H Ismail; Michael K Gould Journal: Clin Lung Cancer Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Lisa Carter-Harris; Robert Skipworth Comer; Anurag Goyal; Emilee Christine Vode; Nasser Hanna; DuyKhanh Ceppa; Susan M Rawl Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2017-11-16