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

      A Mixed Methods Population Health Approach to Explore Radon-Induced Lung Cancer Risk Perception in Canada

      research-article
      , MD, MPH, PhD 1 , , MSc, PhD 2 , , MSc, PhD 3
      Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
      SAGE Publications
      radon, cancer, prevention, mixed methods, population health, risk perception, cancer prevention

      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

          Radon is a predominant indoor air pollutant and second leading cause of lung cancer in radon-prone areas. Despite the gravity of the health risk, residents in Canada have inadequate perception and taken minimal protective actions. Better perception of a risk motivates people to take preventive measures. Scholarship about radon health risk perception is lacking in Canada. We applied a mixed methods population health approach to explore the determinants shaping perception and actions of a resident population in Canada.

          Methods

          We conducted mixed surveys (n = 557) and qualitative bilingual interviews (n = 35) with both homeowners and tenants of Ottawa–Gatineau areas. The study explored residents' risk perception and adaptations factors. Descriptive, correlational and regression analyses described and established associations between quantitative variables. Thematic, inductive analyses identified themes in the qualitative data. A mixed methods analysis triangulated both results to draw a holistic perception of the health risk.

          Results

          Residents’ quantitative perceptions of radon health risk, smoking at home, synergistic risk perception, social influence and care for family were associated significantly with their intention to test for radon levels in their home, actual testing and mitigation. These results were explained further with the qualitative findings. Residents who had dual cognitive and emotional awareness of the risk were motivated enough to take preventive actions. Caring for family, knowing others who contracted lung cancer and financial capability were enablers, whereas lack of awareness and homeownership, cost of mitigation and stigma were obstacles to preventive actions. We also explored the dual subjective and objective aspects of risk perception that are influenced by micro- and macro-level determinants.

          Conclusions

          Inducing protective action to reduce risk requires comprehensive population-level interventions considering dual perceptions of the risk that can modify the risk determinants. Future research can explore the dual aspects of risk perception and unequal distribution of the risk factors.

          Related collections

          Most cited references59

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

          The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice

          The psychological principles that govern the perception of decision problems and the evaluation of probabilities and outcomes produce predictable shifts of preference when the same problem is framed in different ways. Reversals of preference are demonstrated in choices regarding monetary outcomes, both hypothetical and real, and in questions pertaining to the loss of human lives. The effects of frames on preferences are compared to the effects of perspectives on perceptual appearance. The dependence of preferences on the formulation of decision problems is a significant concern for the theory of rational choice.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality.

            Modern theories in cognitive psychology and neuroscience indicate that there are two fundamental ways in which human beings comprehend risk. The "analytic system" uses algorithms and normative rules, such as probability calculus, formal logic, and risk assessment. It is relatively slow, effortful, and requires conscious control. The "experiential system" is intuitive, fast, mostly automatic, and not very accessible to conscious awareness. The experiential system enabled human beings to survive during their long period of evolution and remains today the most natural and most common way to respond to risk. It relies on images and associations, linked by experience to emotion and affect (a feeling that something is good or bad). This system represents risk as a feeling that tells us whether it is safe to walk down this dark street or drink this strange-smelling water. Proponents of formal risk analysis tend to view affective responses to risk as irrational. Current wisdom disputes this view. The rational and the experiential systems operate in parallel and each seems to depend on the other for guidance. Studies have demonstrated that analytic reasoning cannot be effective unless it is guided by emotion and affect. Rational decision making requires proper integration of both modes of thought. Both systems have their advantages, biases, and limitations. Now that we are beginning to understand the complex interplay between emotion and reason that is essential to rational behavior, the challenge before us is to think creatively about what this means for managing risk. On the one hand, how do we apply reason to temper the strong emotions engendered by some risk events? On the other hand, how do we infuse needed "doses of feeling" into circumstances where lack of experience may otherwise leave us too "coldly rational"? This article addresses these important questions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Designing and conducting mixed methods research

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancer Control
                spccx
                CCX
                Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
                SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                1073-2748
                1526-2359
                12 October 2021
                Jan-Dec 2021
                : 28
                : 10732748211039764
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Cumming School of Medicine, Ringgold 2129, universityUniversity of Calgary; , Calgary, AB, Canada
                [2 ]Interdisciplinary School of Health Sciences, Ringgold 70363, universityUniversity of Ottawa; , Ottawa, ON, Canada
                [3 ]Telfer School of Management, Ringgold 56004, universityUniversity of Ottawa; , Ottawa, ON, Canada
                Author notes
                [*]S. M. Khan, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada. Email: selim.khan@ 123456ucalgary.ca
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2357-5125
                Article
                10.1177_10732748211039764
                10.1177/10732748211039764
                8516373
                34634922
                ffc722a8-8568-4759-b7d3-c877978a11e2
                © The Author(s) 2021

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial 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).

                History
                Funding
                Funded by: McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment and University of Ottawa;
                Award ID: 389969
                Funded by: Telfer School of Management;
                Award ID: 602733
                Categories
                Original Research Article
                Custom metadata
                January-December 2021
                ts10

                radon,cancer,prevention,mixed methods,population health,risk perception,cancer prevention

                Comments

                Comment on this article