Factors associated with informed decisions and participation in bowel cancer screening among adults with lower education and literacy

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 34, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 756-772

  Smith, Sian K ^a   Simpson, Judy M ^b   Trevena, Lyndal J ^b,c   McCaffery, Kirsten J ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cancer screening; Decision aids; Decision making; Education; Fecal occult blood test; Health literacy; Informed choice; Predictors; Randomized controlled trials

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COLORECTAL TUMOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HEALTH LITERACY; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEW SOUTH WALES; OCCULT BLOOD; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SEX FACTOR;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEALTH LITERACY; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEW SOUTH WALES; OCCULT BLOOD; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 84907042308     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13518976     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). GLOBOCAN 2008 Cancer Fact Sheet. Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide in 2008. Lyon, France: IARC 2008.
2. Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Watson E, Towler B, Irwig L. Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103(6):1541-9.
3. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare & Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing 2010. National Bowel Cancer Screening Program: annual monitoring report 2009 data supplement 2010. Cancer series no. 57. Cat. no. CAN 53. Canberra, Australia: AIHW.
4. UK Colorectal Cancer Screening Team. English pilot of bowel cancer screening: an evaluation of the second round. Final report to the Department of Health. February 2006 (revised August 2006). Available from: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/bowel/pilot-2nd-round-evaluation.pdf. Accessed 7 September 2009.
5. Barratt A, Trevena L, Davey HM, McCaffery K. Use of decision aids to support informed choices about screening. BMJ. 2004; 329(7464):507-10.
6. General Medical Council (GMC). Seeking Patients' Consent: The Ethical Considerations. London: GMC; 1998.
7. Thornton H. Shared decision-making: personal, professional and political. Int J Surg. 2011;9(3):195-7.
8. Stefanek ME. Uninformed compliance or informed choice? A needed shift in our approach to cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1-6.
9. Marteau T, Dormandy E, Michie S. A measure of informed choice. Health Expectations. 2001;4(2):99-108.
10. Gotzsche PC, Hartling OJ, Nielsen M, Brodersen J, Jorgensen KJ. Breast screening: the facts-or maybe not. BMJ. 2009;338:b86.
11. Gummersbach E, Piccoliori G, Oriol Zerbe C, et al. Are women getting relevant information about mammography screening for an informed consent? A critical appraisal of information brochures used for screening invitation in Germany, Italy, Spain and France. Eur J Public Health. 2010;20(4):409-14.
12. Hoffman RM, Lewis CL, Pignone MP, et al. Decision-making processes for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening: the DECISIONS Survey. Med Decis Making. 2010;30(5, suppl): 53S-64S.
13. Smith SK, Trevena L, Simpson JM, Barratt A, Nutbeam D, McCaffery KJ. A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010;341:c5370.
14. Schroy PC, Emmons KM, Peters E, et al. Aid-assisted decision making and colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(6):573-83.
15. Pignone M, Harris R, Kinsinger L. Videotape-based decision aid for colon cancer screening: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133(10):761-9.
16. Ruffin M, Fetters M, Jimbo M. Preference-based electronic decision aid to promote colorectal cancer screening: results of a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2007;45:267-73.
17. Myers RE, Sifri R, Hyslop T, et al. A randomized controlled trial of the impact of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening. Cancer. 2007;110(9):2083-91.
18. Manne SL, Coups EJ, Markowitz A, et al. A randomized trial of generic versus tailored interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening among intermediate risk siblings. Ann Behav Med. 2009;37(2):207-17.
19. Miller DP Jr, Spangler JG, Case LD, Goff DC Jr, Singh S, Pignone MP. Effectiveness of a web-based colorectal cancer screening patient decision aid: a randomized controlled trial in a mixedliteracy population. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(6):608-15.
20. Pignone M, Winquist A, Schild LA, et al. Effectiveness of a patient and practice-level colorectal cancer screening intervention in health plan members: the CHOICE trial. Cancer. 2011; 117(15):3352-62.
21. Steckelberg A, Hulfenhaus C, Haastert B, Muhlhauser I. Effect of evidence based risk information on "informed choice" in colorectal cancer screening: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2011; 342:d3193.
22. Dolan J, Frisina S. Randomized controlled trial of a patient decision aid for colorectal cancer screening. Med Decis Making. 2002;22:125-39.
23. Trevena L, Irwig L, Barratt A. Randomized trial of a selfadministered decision aid for colorectal cancer screening. J Med Screen. 2008;15(2):76-82.
24. Zapka JG, Lemon SC, Puleo E, Estabrook B, Luckmann R, Erban S. Patient education for colon cancer screening: a randomized trial of a video mailed before a physical examination. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(9):683-92.
25. Vernon SW, Bartholomew LK, McQueen A, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a tailored interactive computer-delivered intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening: sometimes more is just the same. Ann Behav Med. 2011;41(3):284-99.
26. Dormandy E, MichieS, Hooper R, MarteauTM.Lowuptake of prenatal screening for Down syndrome in minority ethnic groups and socially deprived groups: a reflection of women's attitudes or a failure to facilitate informed choices? Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(2):346-52.
27. Brown K, Dormandy E, Reid E, Gulliford M, Marteau T. Impact on informed choice of offering antenatal sickle cell and thalassaemia screening in primary care: a randomized trial. J Med Screen. 2011;18(2):65-75.
28. Nutbeam D. Health literacy as a public health goal: a challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21st century. Health Promotion Int. 2000;15(3):259-67.
29. Dolan NC, Rosario Ferreira M, Davis TC, et al. Colorectal cancer screening knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs among veterans: does literacy make a difference? J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(13): 2617-22.
30. Miller D, Brownlee C, McCoy T, Pignone M. The effect of health literacy on knowledge and receipt of colorectal cancer screening: a survey study. BMC Fam Pract. 2007;8(1):16.
31. von Wagner C, Semmler C, Good A, Wardle J. Health literacy and self-efficacy for participating in colorectal cancer screening: the role of information processing. Patient Educ Counsel. 2009; 75(3):352-7.
32. Davis TC, Dolan NC, Ferreira MR, et al. The role of inadequate health literacy skills in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Invest. 2001;19(2):193-200.
33. Wolf MS, Satterlee M, Calhoun EA, et al. Colorectal cancer screening among the medically underserved. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2006;17(1):47-54.
34. vonWagner C, Semmler C,Good A,Wardle J. Health literacy and self efficacy in participating incolorectal cancer screening: the role of information processing. Patient Educ Counsel 2009 75 352-7.
35. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey, Summary Results. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service; 2006.
36. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. National Bowel Cancer Screening Program Monitoring Report 2008. Cancer series no. 44. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing for the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program 2008.
37. Entwistle VA, Carter SM, Trevena L, et al. Communicating about screening. BMJ. 2008;337:a1591.
38. Lillie SE, Brewer NT, O'Neill SC, et al. Retention and use of breast cancer recurrence risk information from genomic tests: the role of health literacy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007; 16(2):249-55.
39. Mancuso CA, Rincon M. Impact of health literacy on longitudinal asthma outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(8):813-7.
40. McCaffery K, Sheridan S, Nutbeam D, et al. International patient decision aid standards collaboration. Update of the IPDAS Collaboration Background Document. 2012 updated Chapter J: Addressing health literacy (original title: using plain language). Available from: http://ipdasohrica/resourceshtml
41. Entwistle VA, Carter S, Cribb A, McCaffery KJ. Supporting patient autonomy: the importance of clinician-patient relationships. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(7):741-5.
42. Waller J, Macedo A, von Wagner C, et al. Communication about colorectal cancer screening in Britain: public preferences for an expert recommendation. Br J Cancer. 2012;107(12):1938-43.
43. Houts PS, Doak CC, Doak LG, Loscalzo MJ. The role of pictures in improving health communication: a review of research on attention, comprehension, recall, and adherence. Patient Educ Counsel. 2006;61(2):173-90.
44. Doak CC, Doak LG, Friedell GH, Meade CD. Improving comprehension for cancer patients with low literacy skills: strategies for clinicians. CA Cancer J Clin. 1998;48(3):151-62.
45. Doak CC, Doak LG, Root JH. Teaching Patients with Low Literacy Skills. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: J. B. Lippincott; 1996.
46. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales:AUser's Manual. Boston, MA: The Health Institute: New England Medical Center; 1994.
47. Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ. Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med. 2004;36(8): 588-94.
48. Morris NS, Maclean CD, Chew LD, Littenberg B. The Single Item Literacy Screener: evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limited reading ability. BMC Fam Pract. 2006;7(1):21-35.
49. Sutton S, Wardle J, Taylor T, et al. Predictors of attendance in the United Kingdom flexible sigmoidoscopy screening trial. J Med Screen. 2000;7(2):99-104.
50. Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997;29(3):21-43.
51. Mathieu E, Barratt A, Davey HM, McGeechan K, Howard K, Houssami N. Informed choice in mammography screening: a randomized trial of a decision aid for 70-year-old women. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(19):2039-46.
52. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):966-72.
53. Smith SK, Barratt A, Trevena L, Simpson JM, Jansen J, McCaffery KJ. A theoretical framework for measuring knowledge in screening decision aid trials. Patient Educ Counsel. 2012;89(2): 330-6.
54. Reyna VF, Nelson WL, Han PK, Dieckmann NF. How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychol Bull. 2009;135(6):943-73.
55. Gigerenzer G. What does the public know about the benefits of breast and prostate cancer screening? A representative survey of nine European countries. Presented at: 5th International Shared Decision Making Conference Shared Decision Making: Vision to Reality; 14-17 June 2009; Boston, Massachusetts.
56. Akl EA, Oxman AD, Herrin J, et al. Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(3):CD006776.
57. McNutt L-A, Wu C, Xue X, Hafner JP. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;157(10):940-3.
58. Jimbo M, Rana GK, Hawley S, et al. What is lacking in current decision aids on cancer screening? CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63(3): 193-214.
59. Wolf A, Schorling J. Does informed consent alter elderly patients' preferences for colorectal cancer screening? Results of a randomized trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:24-30.
60. Llupia A, Gene-Badia J, Trilla A, McCaffery KJ, Elwyn G. Should screening be an offer that is difficult to refuse?Asystematic review of decision support interventions for individuals considering bowel cancer screening. Int J Person Centered Med. 2012;2(4): 780-91.
61. Gigerenzer G, Mata J, Frank R. Public knowledge of benefits of breast and prostate cancer screening in Europe. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(17):1216-20.
62. Hyde JS, Mertz JE. Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2009;106(22):8801-7.
63. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Fowler FJ Jr, Welch HG. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA. 2004; 291(1):71-8.
64. Welch HG. Screening mammography: a long run for a short slide? N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1276-8.
65. Denberg TD, Wong S, Beattie A. Women's misconceptions about cancer screening: implications for informed decisionmaking. Patient Educ Counsel. 2005;57(3):280-5.
66. Smith SK, Trevena L, Nutbeam D, Barratt A, McCaffery KJ. Information needs and preferences of low and high literacy consumers for decisions about colorectal cancer screening: utilizing a linguistic model. Health Expectations. 2008;11(2):123-36.
67. McCaffery K, Wardle J, Nadel M, Atkin W. Socioeconomic variation in participation in colorectal cancer screening. J MedScreen. 2002;9(3):104-8.
68. Weller D, Coleman D, Robertson R, et al. The UK Colorectal Cancer screening pilot: results of the second round of screening in England. Br J Cancer. 2007;97:1601-5.
69. Ioannou GN, Chapko MK, Dominitz JA. Predictors of colorectal cancer screening participation in the United States.AmJ Gastroenterol. 2003;98(9):2082-91.
70. Miles A, Rainbow S, von Wagner C. Cancer fatalism and poor self-rated health mediate the association between socioeconomic status and uptake of colorectal cancer screening in England. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011;20(10):2132-40.
71. Miller AB. Conundrums in screening for cancer. Int J Cancer. 2010;126:1039-46.
72. Hersch J, Jansen J, Irwig L, et al. How do we achieve informed choice for women considering breast screening? Prev Med. 2011; 53(3):144-6.
73. Smith SK, Kearney P, Trevena L, Barratt A, Nutbeam D, McCaffery KJ. Informed choice in bowel cancer screening: a qualitative study to explore how adults with lower education use decision aids [published online April 19, 2012]. Health Expectations.
74. Powers BJ, Trinh JV, Bosworth HB. Can this patient read and understand written health information? JAMA. 2010;304(1): 76-84.
75. McCaffery KJ, Irwig L, Turner R, et al. Psychosocial outcomes of three triage methods for the management of borderline abnormal cervical smears: an open randomised trial. BMJ. 2010;340:b4491.
76. Sense about Science. Making sense of screening. Available from: www.senseaboutscience.org. Accessed 6 November 2009.
77. Torgerson DJ, Donaldson C. An economic view of high compliance as a screening objective. BMJ. 1994;308:117-9.
78. Howard K, Salkeld G, Irwig L, Adelstein BA. High participation rates are not necessary for cost-effective colorectal cancer screening. J Med Screen. 2005;12:96-102.
79. Elwyn G, Lloyd A, Joseph-Williams N, et al. Option grids: shared decision making made easier. Patient Educ Counsel. 2013;90(2):207-12.
80. Australian Cancer Network Colorectal Cancer Guidelines Revision Committee. Guidelines for the Prevention, Early Detection and Management of Colorectal Cancer. Sydney, Australia: The Cancer Council Australia and Australian Cancer Network; 2005.