Literature DB >> 30958101

Predicting Colorectal Cancer Screening among Adults Who Have Never Been Screened: Testing the Interaction between Message Framing and Tailored Risk Feedback.

Isaac M Lipkus1, Constance Johnson2, Sathya Amarasekara1, Wei Pan1, John A Updegraff3.   

Abstract

Providing adults tailored risk estimates of getting colorectal cancer (CRC) can increase screening. A concern is that receipt of lower risk estimates will demotivate screening; this effect may be curbed by matching level of risk with message framing. Theoretically, pairing lower risk estimates with gain-frame messages, and higher risk estimates with loss-frame messages, should increase screening and screening intentions more than pairing lower risk estimates with loss-frame messages/higher risk estimates with gain-frame messages. These effects may be mediated by how screening is construed (e.g., to find health problems vs. to reaffirm one is healthy). These predictions were tested experimentally among 560 men and women ages 50-75 who have never screened. Participants at baseline received online a tailored comparative risk estimate with gain- or loss-frame information on screening. Screening was assessed six months later. Among the 400 reached at six months, 9.5% reported screening. There were no main effects or interactions between risk feedback and framing predicting construals, screening intentions, or screening. Worry about getting CRC and screening intentions predicted screening. While hypothesized interactions were not found, future research should explore further mechanisms through which online interventions utilizing risk feedback and framing motivate screening among adults who have never screened.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30958101      PMCID: PMC6852613          DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2019.1597950

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Commun        ISSN: 1081-0730


  23 in total

1.  An affective booster moderates the effect of gain- and loss-framed messages on behavioral intentions for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Rebecca A Ferrer; William M P Klein; Laura E Zajac; Stephanie R Land; Bruce S Ling
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2011-08-18

Review 2.  The precaution adoption process.

Authors:  N D Weinstein
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 3.  The role of dispositional factors in moderating message framing effects.

Authors:  Judith Covey
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 4.267

4.  Perceived risk as a moderator of the effectiveness of framed HIV-test promotion messages among women: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Shawnika J Hull
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 5.  Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Jennifer S Lin; Margaret A Piper; Leslie A Perdue; Carolyn M Rutter; Elizabeth M Webber; Elizabeth O'Connor; Ning Smith; Evelyn P Whitlock
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Harvard report on cancer prevention volume 4: Harvard Cancer Risk Index. Risk Index Working Group, Harvard Center for Cancer Prevention.

Authors:  G A Colditz; K A Atwood; K Emmons; R R Monson; W C Willett; D Trichopoulos; D J Hunter
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.506

7.  Patient-reported barriers to colorectal cancer screening: a mixed-methods analysis.

Authors:  Resa M Jones; Kelly J Devers; Anton J Kuzel; Steven H Woolf
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 8.  Does colorectal cancer risk perception predict screening behavior? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Thomas M Atkinson; Talya Salz; Kaitlin K Touza; Yuelin Li; Jennifer L Hay
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2015-08-18

9.  Using message framing to motivate HIV testing among low-income, ethnic minority women.

Authors:  Anne Marie Apanovitch; Danielle McCarthy; Peter Salovey
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 10.  Cancer screening in the United States, 2016: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening.

Authors:  Robert A Smith; Kimberly Andrews; Durado Brooks; Carol E DeSantis; Stacey A Fedewa; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Deana Manassaram-Baptiste; Otis W Brawley; Richard C Wender
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 508.702

View more
  1 in total

1.  Effects of culturally targeted message framing on colorectal cancer screening among African Americans.

Authors:  Todd Lucas; Hayley S Thompson; James Blessman; Anurag Dawadi; Caroline E Drolet; Kelly A Hirko; Louis A Penner
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 4.267

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.