Testing Different Formats for Communicating Colorectal Cancer Risk

Abstract

This study assessed the extent to which different formats of informing men and women age 50 and over of the risks of colorectal cancer (CRC) affected their perceptions of their absolute and comparative (self versus other) 10-year and lifetime risks; emotional reactions about getting CRC; and screening intentions. Forty-four men and 78 women received information about the absolute lifetime risk of getting CRC. In addition, participants either did or did not receive information about (1) lifetime risk of getting CRC compared with other cancers, and (2) risk factors for CRC (age and polyps). Participants who received risk factors information were more likely to increase their perceived absolute 10-year and lifetime risks of getting CRC compared with participants who did not receive risk factors information. In addition, participants who received risk factors information were more likely to believe age was related to getting CRC and felt at greater risk for having polyps compared with participants who did not receive this information. None of the experimental conditions affected how worried, anxious, and fearful participants felt about getting CRC, nor did they affect screening intentions. Independent of experimental condition, participants tended to increase their intentions to get screened for CRC in the next year or two. Intention to be screened was more pronounced among participants who had been screened via a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or sigmoidoscopy (SIG). Implications for the design of interventions involving the communication of CRC risks are discussed.

Making decisions in a complex information environment: evidential preference and information we trust

“…Lipkus et al confirmed the importance of presenting risk information to those making decisions about health behaviors [27]. This research suggests that risk information can be presented to increase perceived risk without increasing worry, fear, or anxiety.…”

Impact of Delivery Models on Understanding Genomic Risk for Type 2 Diabetes

“…Some evidence suggests that personalizing risk factors may increase individuals’ perceived disease risk [74–76]. At baseline, our study population was divided between low and intermediate perceived risk, perhaps reflecting some optimistic bias given the high prevalence of reported family history [77–79].…”

Testing Map Features Designed to Convey the Uncertainty of Cancer Risk

“…However, evidence of these proposed influences is mixed. While Lipkus et al (1999) found no association between risk beliefs and these adequacy judgments, Dieckmann, Slovic, and Peters (2009) found that participants who rated risk information as more credible tended to have beliefs of greater risk.…”

“…Perceiving information as credible, trustworthy, and/or accurate is expected to foster message adoption and resulting changes in perceived risk and intentions to engage in protective behavior (Lipkus et al, 1999; Schapira, Nattinger, & McAuliffe, 2006). However, evidence of these proposed influences is mixed.…”