The perception gap: how the benefits and harms of cervical cancer screening are understood in information material focusing on informed choice

Petersen, G.; Damhus, Christina Sadolin; Jønsson, Alexandra Brandt Ryborg; Brodersen, John

doi:10.1080/13698575.2020.1778645

Cited by 18 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is possible that women rejected the information they read because it conflicted with their existing belief, in line with cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957). In a recent Danish study (Petersen, Jønsson, & Brodersen, 2020) where women discussed their understanding of cervical screening information, participants interpreted the information they were given in light of their existing understanding of screening and rejected information that contradicted their understanding. Previous work (Marlow et al, 2017) suggested that for older women who do not plan to attend screening, an intervention designed to address motivation may be appropriate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the content for a targeted age‐relevant intervention to promote cervical screening uptake in women aged 50–64 years

Marlow

Němec

Vlaev

et al. 2021

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. Low uptake of cervical screening in women in their 50s and 60s leaves them at elevated risk of cancer in older age. An age-targeted intervention could be an effective way to motivate older women to attend cervical screening. Our primary objective was to test the impact of different candidate messages on cervical screening intention strength. Design.A cross-sectional online survey with randomized exposure to different candidate messages.Methods. Women aged 50-64 years who were not intending to be screened when next invited were recruited through an online panel. Those meeting the inclusion criteria (n = 825) were randomized to one of three groups: (1) control group, (2) intervention group 1, (3) intervention group 2. Each intervention group saw three candidate messages. These included a descriptive social norms message, a diagram illustrating the likelihood of each possible screening outcome, a response efficacy message, a risk reduction message and an acknowledgement of the potential for screening discomfort. We tested agetargeted versions (vs. generic) of some messages. The primary outcome was screening intention strength.Results. After adjusting for baseline intention, social norms (p = .425), outcome expectancy (p = .367), risk reduction (p = .090), response efficacy (p = .136) and discomfort acknowledgement messages (p = .181) had no effect on intention strength. Age-targeted messages did not result in greater intention than generic ones.Conclusions. There was no evidence that a single message used to convey social norms, outcome expectancy, risk reduction or response efficacy had an impact on intention strength for older women who did not plan to be screened in future.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the content for a targeted age‐relevant intervention to promote cervical screening uptake in women aged 50–64 years

Marlow

Němec

Vlaev

et al. 2021

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Psychosocial consequences are often not mentioned when inviting citizens to screening programmes but should be included to support an informed decision about screening. It is essential to include both the benefits and harms in such material as research shows that participants tend to downplay the harms of screening [ 28 , 29 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychosocial consequences of screening-detected abdominal aortic aneurisms: a cross-sectional study

Damhus

Siersma

Hansson

et al. 2021

Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective In Sweden, an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening programme was gradually implemented from 2009 to reduce the incidence of rupture and thereby mortality. AAA screening introduces a variety of unintended, but generally unavoidable, harms, e.g. stress and worry. Such psychosocial consequences have previously only been investigated with generic measures. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe and compare the psychosocial consequences in men with a screening detected AAA to men with a normal screening result after they participated in the Swedish national AAA-screening programme using a validated psychometric instrument. Material and methods This study was a cross-sectional survey. Data were originally collected to validate the COS-AAA and has previously been published in details. The Consequences of Screening in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (COS-AAA) questionnaire was sent to 250 men with a screening detected AAA and 500 with a normal screening result who were randomly selected from a Swedish population-based screening register. Results In total, 158 (63%) men with a screening detected AAA and 275 (55%) men with a normal screening result completed the COS-AAA. We found that men with a screening detected AAA reported negative psychosocial consequences to a greater extent in 10 of 13 COS-AAA Part 1 scales, all statistically significant except three (behaviour, sleep and negative experiences from examination). For COS-AAA Part 2, there was a statistically significant difference between groups in four of five scales. Conclusions Men diagnosed with a screening detected AAA, reported more negative psychosocial consequences compared to men with a normal result. Screening for abdominal aorta aneurism (AAA) introduces intended benefits and unintended harms. Adequate measures are necessary to determine the balance between them. Key points: This study applied a condition-specific questionnaire with high content validity and adequate psychometric properties to measure psychosocial consequences in men participating in AAA screening. We found that men with a screening detected AAA reported more negative psychosocial consequences than men with a normal aorta size. The risk of negative psychosocial consequences is important to include in the decision making on whether to participate in screening or not.

show abstract

“…For counselling and clinical risk communication with the individual patient is a complex task filled with difficulties and pitfalls, e.g. that lay people might understand the concept of overdiagnosis and that strong pre-assumption among lay people might create a perception gap (Hoffmann and Del Mar, 2015;Moynihan et al, 2015;Byskov Petersen et al, 2020). Counselling could also help increase patient involvement and give patients the opportunity to decide on whether they prefer a process involving or not involving a ML system.…”

Section: Similarities With Genetic Testing and Other Forms Of Clinical Diagnosticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of our experts has co-authored a Cochrane review where they did not find this kind of evidence and until then no screening should be performed. Moreover, making a free evidence-based informed choice of whether to be screened or not is not "free", is not "informed" and is "framed" (Henriksen et al, 2015;Johansson et al, 2019;Byskov Petersen et al, 2020;Rahbek et al, 2021).…”

Section: Tensionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Design of a Trustworthy AI System in Healthcare: Deep Learning Based Skin Lesion Classifier

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper documents how an ethically aligned co-design methodology ensures trustworthiness in the early design phase of an artificial intelligence (AI) system component for healthcare. The system explains decisions made by deep learning networks analyzing images of skin lesions. The co-design of trustworthy AI developed here used a holistic approach rather than a static ethical checklist and required a multidisciplinary team of experts working with the AI designers and their managers. Ethical, legal, and technical issues potentially arising from the future use of the AI system were investigated. This paper is a first report on co-designing in the early design phase. Our results can also serve as guidance for other early-phase AI-similar tool developments.

show abstract

The perception gap: how the benefits and harms of cervical cancer screening are understood in information material focusing on informed choice

Cited by 18 publications

References 53 publications

Testing the content for a targeted age‐relevant intervention to promote cervical screening uptake in women aged 50–64 years

Testing the content for a targeted age‐relevant intervention to promote cervical screening uptake in women aged 50–64 years

Psychosocial consequences of screening-detected abdominal aortic aneurisms: a cross-sectional study

Co-Design of a Trustworthy AI System in Healthcare: Deep Learning Based Skin Lesion Classifier

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About