3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How narratives influence colorectal cancer screening decision making and uptake: A realist review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      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

          Although narratives have been found to affect decisions about preventive behaviours, including participation in cancer screening, the underlying mechanisms of narratives remain unclear.

          Objective

          The purpose of this study was to summarize and synthesize existing literature on narrative interventions in the context of colorectal cancer screening. Our main research question was as follows: How, when and for whom do narratives work context of decision making about colorectal cancer screening participation?

          Methods

          We undertook a realist review to collect evidence on narratives in the context of colorectal cancer screening. A search of the literature was performed in Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, Cinahl and PsycINFO. We included empirical evaluations (qualitative or quantitative) of narrative interventions. In total, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. A content‐based taxonomy of patient narrative types in decision aids formed the basis for our initial programme theory.

          Main result

          We identified four mechanisms: (a) process narratives that address perceived barriers towards screening lead to improved affective forecasting, (b) experience narratives that demonstrate the screening procedure lead to increased self‐efficacy, (c) experience narratives that depict experiences from similar others lead to more engagement and (d) outcome narratives that focus on outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision decrease or increase fear of colorectal cancer. The evidence was limited on which narrative type may facilitate or bias informed decision making in colorectal cancer screening.

          Discussion and conclusion

          The findings indicate the importance of more detailed descriptions of narrative interventions in order to understand how mechanisms may facilitate or bias informed decision making in colorectal cancer screening.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

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

          Achieving cultural appropriateness in health promotion programs: targeted and tailored approaches.

          It is a truism of health education that programs and interventions will be more effective when they are culturally appropriate for the populations they serve. In practice, however, the strategies used to achieve cultural appropriateness vary widely. This article briefly describes five strategies commonly used to target programs to culturally defined groups. It then explains how a sixth approach, cultural tailoring, might extend these strategies and enhance our ability to develop effective programs for cultural groups. The authors illustrate this new approach with an example of cultural tailoring forcancer prevention in a population of lower income urban African American women.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Challenges and possible solutions to colorectal cancer screening for the underserved.

            Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. CRC incidence and mortality can be reduced through screening. However, in the United States, screening participation remains suboptimal, particularly among underserved populations such as the uninsured, recent immigrants, and racial/ethnic minority groups. Increasing screening rates among underserved populations will reduce the US burden of CRC. In this commentary focusing on underserved populations, we highlight the public health impact of CRC screening, list key challenges to screening the underserved, and review promising approaches to boost screening rates. We identify four key policy and research priorities to increase screening among underserved populations: 1) actively promote the message, "the best test is the one that gets done"; 2) develop and implement methods to identify unscreened individuals within underserved population groups for screening interventions; 3) develop and implement approaches for organized screening delivery; and 4) fund and enhance programs and policies that provide access to screening, diagnostic follow-up, and CRC treatment for underserved populations. This commentary represents the consensus of a diverse group of experts in cancer control and prevention, epidemiology, gastroenterology, and primary care from across the country who formed the Coalition to Boost Screening among the Underserved in the United States. The group was organized and held its first annual working group meeting in conjunction with the World Endoscopy Organization's annual Colorectal Cancer Screening Committee meeting during Digestive Disease Week 2012 in San Diego, California.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Building Realist Program Theory for Large Complex and Messy Interventions

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                a.j.woudstra@amc.uva.nl
                Journal
                Health Expect
                Health Expect
                10.1111/(ISSN)1369-7625
                HEX
                Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1369-6513
                1369-7625
                25 April 2019
                June 2019
                : 22
                : 3 ( doiID: 10.1111/hex.2019.22.issue-3 )
                : 327-337
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Public Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Academic Medical Center University of Amsterdam Amsterdam The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Anke Judith Woudstra, Department of Public Health, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

                Email: a.j.woudstra@ 123456amc.uva.nl

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6685-6168
                Article
                HEX12892
                10.1111/hex.12892
                6543268
                31025444
                774e9263-350b-412b-b295-6f91147a276b
                © 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 11 September 2018
                : 19 February 2019
                : 24 March 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 1, Pages: 11, Words: 7265
                Funding
                Funded by: European Integration Fund (EIF)
                Award ID: 2013EIF036
                Categories
                Review Article
                Review Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                hex12892
                June 2019
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:5.6.4 mode:remove_FC converted:31.05.2019

                Health & Social care
                colorectal cancer screening,decision making,narratives,screening uptake,storytelling

                Comments

                Comment on this article