4.7 Article

Factors associated with colorectal cancer screening decision stage

Journal

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 51, Issue 3-4, Pages 329-331

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.06.015

Keywords

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening; Screening decisions; Preferences; Preventive cancer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. This paper reports on factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision stage (SDS) in screening-eligible primary care patients. Methods. Baseline telephone survey data (i.e., sociodemographic background. CRC screening perceptions, and SDS) were obtained for 1515 patients in a randomized behavioral intervention trial. Respondents reported SDS, a measure of proximity to actual screening, after listening to descriptions of screening stool blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy as had never heard of (NHO), were not considering or were undecided (NCU), or decided to do (DTD) each test. Polychotomous regression analyses were performed to differentiate participants by SDS. Results. At baseline, SOS was distributed as follows: NHO (8%), NCU (41%), and DTD (51%). We found that individuals who had DID compared to those who were NCU about screening were older (OR = 0.64), had prior cancer screening (OR = 1.43), believed screening is important (OR = 3.44), and had high social support (OR = 2.49). Persons who were NCU compared to NHO participants were female (OR = 2.18), were white (OR = 2.35), had prior cancer screening (OR = 2.81), and believed screening is important (OR = 2.44). Conclusions. Prior screening and belief in screening importance were found to be consistently associated with SOS across comparisons, while older age, gender, race, and social support were not. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available