16
IRUS Total
Downloads
  Altmetric

Cancer worry frequency vs. intensity and self-reported colorectal cancer screening uptake: A population-based study.

File Description SizeFormat 
0969141319842331.pdfPublished version520.03 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Cancer worry frequency vs. intensity and self-reported colorectal cancer screening uptake: A population-based study.
Authors: Vrinten, C
Stoffel, S
Dodd, RH
Waller, J
Lyratzopoulos, Y
Von Wagner, C
Item Type: Journal Article
Abstract: Objectives Many studies of cancer worry use items measuring frequency or intensity. Little is known about how each of these relate to cancer screening uptake. This study compared the association between worry frequency vs. intensity and colorectal cancer screening intention/uptake. Methods Across four surveys (2014–2016), we collected data from 2878 screening-eligible men and women (aged 60–70) in England. Measures included single-items assessing cancer worry frequency and intensity, and a derived combination of both. We also assessed self-reported past faecal occult blood testing uptake (ever vs. never), intention to participate when next invited (yes vs. no), and demographics. Using logistic regression, we compared a model containing sociodemographic characteristics (Model 1), with four models adding cancer worry frequency (Model 2), intensity (Model 3), both (Model 4), or the combined measure (Model 5). Results A model with cancer worry intensity and demographics (Model 3) explained significantly more variance in uptake and intention (R2 = 0.068 and 0.062, respectively) than demographics alone (Model 1: R2 = 0.058 and 0.042; p < 0.001), or a model with demographics and cancer worry frequency (Model 2: R2 = 0.059 and 0.052; p < 0.001). The model was also equally as effective as models including both the frequency and intensity items (Model 4: R2 = 0.070 n.s. and 0.062 n.s.), or using the derived combination of both (Model 5: R2 = 0.063 n.s. and 0.053 n.s.). Conclusion A single item measure of cancer worry intensity appeared to be most parsimonious for explaining variance in colorectal cancer screening intention and uptake.
Issue Date: 1-Dec-2019
Date of Acceptance: 15-Mar-2019
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/70191
DOI: 10.1177/0969141319842331
ISSN: 0969-1413
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Start Page: 169
End Page: 178
Journal / Book Title: Journal of Medical Screening
Volume: 26
Issue: 4
Copyright Statement: © The Author(s) 2019. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Keywords: Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Cancer
fear
worry
anxiety
colorectal cancer
screening
faecal occult blood test
PERCEIVED RISK
OLDER-ADULTS
PARTICIPATION
ASSOCIATIONS
FEAR
INFORMATION
MAMMOGRAPHY
PERCEPTIONS
PREDICTORS
STRATEGIES
Cancer
anxiety
colorectal cancer
faecal occult blood test
fear
screening
worry
Cancer
anxiety
colorectal cancer
faecal occult blood test
fear
screening
worry
Public Health
1117 Public Health and Health Services
Publication Status: Published
Conference Place: England
Open Access location: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0969141319842331
Online Publication Date: 2019-05-01
Appears in Collections:Imperial College Business School