28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Cancer Fatalism and Poor Self-Rated Health Mediate the Association between Socioeconomic Status and Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening in England

      , ,
      Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
      American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Little is known about the psychological predictors of colorectal screening uptake in England and mediators of associations between uptake and socioeconomic status (SES). This study tested the hypotheses that although higher threat and efficacy beliefs, lower cancer fatalism, lower depression, and better self-rated health would predict higher screening uptake, only efficacy beliefs, fatalism, depression, and self-rated health would mediate associations between uptake and SES.

          Methods: Data from 529 adults aged 60 to 69 who had completed a postal survey in 2005–2006 were linked with data on fecal occult blood test (FOBt) uptake recorded at the screening “hub” following its introduction in 2007, resulting in a prospective study.

          Results: Screening uptake was 56% and was higher among people with higher SES, better self-rated health, higher self-efficacy beliefs, and lower cancer fatalism in univariate analyses. Path analysis on participants with complete data (n = 515) showed that both better self-rated health and lower cancer fatalism were directly associated with higher uptake of FOBt screening and significantly mediated pathways from SES to uptake. Lower depression only had an indirect effect on uptake through better self-rated health. Efficacy beliefs did not mediate the relationship between SES and uptake.

          Conclusion: SES differences in uptake of FOBt in England are partially explained by differences in cancer fatalism, self-rated health, and depression.

          Impact: This is one of only a few studies to examine mediators of the relationship between SES and screening uptake, and future research could test the effectiveness of interventions to reduce fatalistic beliefs to increase equality of uptake. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 20(10); 2132–40. ©2011 AACR.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change1

            A protection motivation theory is proposed that postulates the three crucial components of a fear appeal to be (a) the magnitude of noxiousness of a depicted event; (b) the probability of that event's occurrence; and (c) the efficacy of a protective response. Each of these communication variables initiates corresponding cognitive appraisal processes that mediate attitude change. The proposed conceptualization is a special case of a more comprehensive theoretical schema: expectancy-value theories. Several suggestions are offered for reinterpreting existing data, designing new types of empirical research, and making future studies more comparable. Finally, the principal advantages of protection motivation theory over the rival formulations of Janis and Leventhal are discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Historical Origins of the Health Belief Model

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
                American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
                1055-9965
                1538-7755
                October 01 2011
                October 5 2011
                October 01 2011
                October 5 2011
                : 20
                : 10
                : 2132-2140
                Article
                10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0453
                3199581
                21953115
                10702c2f-51c6-4148-8e39-301623814a31
                © 2011
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article