Dataset Information

People's willingness to accept overdetection in cancer screening: population survey.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To describe the level of overdetection people would find acceptable in screening for breast, prostate, and bowel cancer and whether acceptability is influenced by the magnitude of the benefit from screening and the cancer specific harms from overdetection.

Design

Online survey. Women were presented with scenarios on breast and bowel cancer, men with scenarios on prostate and bowel cancer. For each particular cancer, we presented epidemiological information and described the treatment and its consequences. Secondly, we presented two different scenarios of benefit: one indicating a 10% reduction in cancer specific mortality and the second indicating a 50% reduction.

Setting

Online survey of the population in the United Kingdom.

Participants

Respondents were part of an existing panel of people who volunteer for online research and were invited by email or online marketing. We recruited 1000 respondents, representative for age and sex for the UK population.

Main outcome measures

Number of cases of overdetection people were willing to accept, ranging from 0-1000 (complete screened population) for each cancer modality and each scenario of benefit.

Results

There was large variability between respondents in the level of overdetection they would find acceptable, with medians ranging from 113 to 313 cases of overdetection per 1000 people screened. Across all scenarios, 4-7% of respondents indicated they would accept no overdetection at all compared with 7-14% who thought that it would be acceptable for the entire screened population to be overdetected. Acceptability in screening for bowel cancer was significantly lower than for breast and prostate cancer. People aged 50 or over accepted significantly less overdetection, whereas people with higher education levels accepted more; 29% of respondents had heard of overdetection before.

Conclusions

Acceptability of overdetection in cancer screening is variable. Invitations for screening should include clear information on the likelihood and consequences of overdetection to allow people to make an informed choice.

SUBMITTER: Van den Bruel A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4356995 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 globally is well over 400 million, however, the number of cases is showing a downward trend especially in developed countries largely as a result of effective vaccination against COVID-19. In developing countries, vaccination coverage is still very low as a result of vaccine hesitancy, which could be attributed to misconceptions about COVID-19 itself and its newly developed vaccines. This study assessed COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and perception amongst the adult population in Sokoto state, Nigeria. A cross-sectional study was conducted in Sokoto state among 854 respondents selected via a multi-stage sampling technique. Data was collected electronically using a set of structured questionnaire and analysis was done using IBM SPSS version 25. Respondents' perception was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Respondents having a score of 3 and below were graded as having poor perception and those having scores above 3 were graded as having good perception. Respondents' ages ranged from 17 to 76 years, with a mean of 34.8±12.07; more than half [474(53.7%)] of the respondents were males, 667(75.5%) were married and 539(61.0%) had formal education. The majority [839(95.0%)] of the respondents had a good perception of COVID -19 vaccine; 49.9% agreed enough research would be required on the safety of the vaccine. The majority, (72.4%) expressed their willingness to accept the COVID- 19 vaccine (male 38.4% vs. female 34.0%); 410(47.4%) said they can spend more than one hour to get the vaccine. Significant predictors of willingness to accept COVID 19 vaccine include age (p = 0.006; aOR = 0.223; 95% CI = 0.077-0.645), education (p<0.001; aOR = 1.720; 95% CI = 1.274-2.321) and perception of COVID 19 vaccine (p<0.001; aOR = 0.020; 95% CI = 0.009-0.044). The majority of the respondents had a good perception of COVID- 19 vaccine and more than two-thirds were willing to be vaccinated with the vaccine. Government should make the vaccine available for vaccination since a significant proportion of the respondents expressed their willingness to accept the vaccine.

Project description:PURPOSE:This study determined the predictors of caregivers' willingness to accept an accelerated regulatory process for the development of vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS:An international cross-sectional survey was administered to 2557 caregivers of children in 17 pediatric emergency departments (EDs) across 6 countries from March 26, 2020, to June 30, 2020. Caregivers were asked to select 1 of 4 choices with which they most agreed regarding a proposed COVID-19 vaccine-approval process, in addition to questions regarding demographic characteristics, the ED visit, and attitudes about COVID-19. Univariate analyses were conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test for comparing non-normally distributed continuous variables, an independent t test for comparing normally distributed continuous variables, and a ?2 or Fisher exact test for categorical variables. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used for determining independent factors associated with caregivers' willingness to accept abridged development of a COVID-19 vaccine. A P value of <0.05 was considered significant. FINDINGS:Almost half (1101/2557; 43%) of caregivers reported that they were willing to accept less rigorous testing and postresearch approval of a new COVID-19 vaccine. Independent factors associated with caregivers' willingness to accept expedited COVID-19 vaccine research included having children who were up to date on the vaccination schedule (odds ratio [OR] = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.29-2.31), caregivers' concern about having had COVID-19 themselves at the time of survey completion in the ED (OR = 1.1; 95% CI, 1.05-1.16), and caregivers' intent to have their children vaccinated against COVID-19 if a vaccine were to become available (OR = 1.84; 95% CI, 1.54-2.21). Compared with fathers, mothers completing the survey were less likely to approve of changes in the vaccine-development process (OR = 0.641; 95% CI, 0.529-0.775). IMPLICATIONS:Less than half of caregivers in this worldwide sample were willing to accept abbreviated COVID-19 vaccine testing. As a part of an effort to increase acceptance and uptake of a new vaccine, especially in order to protect children, public health strategies and individual providers should understand caregivers' attitudes toward the approval of a vaccine and consult them appropriately.

Project description:ObjectivesNigeria has been badly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the poor testing coverage in the country may make controlling the spread of COVID-19 challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the general public's acceptability of SARS-CoV-2 self-testing as an approach which could help to address this gap.SettingA household-based survey was conducted in five urban and five rural local government areas in the states of Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Benue, Kaduna and Lagos, in mid-2021.Participants2126 respondents (969 were female) participated. A five-pronged, probabilistic sampling approach was used to recruit individuals older than 17 years and available to participate when randomly approached in their households by the surveyors. A 35-item questionnaire was used to collect data on their values towards SARS-CoV-2 self-testing. Primary outcomes were: likelihood to use a self-test; willingness to pay for a self-test; and likely actions following a reactive self-test result.ResultsOf the total 2126 respondents, 14 (0.66%) were aware of COVID-19 self-testing, 1738 (81.80%) agreed with the idea of people being able to self-test for COVID-19, 1786 (84.05%) were likely/very likely to use self-tests if available, 1931 (90.87%) would report a positive result and 1875 (88.28%) would isolate if they self-tested positive. Factors significantly associated with the use of a self-test were having a college education or higher (adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 1.55; 95% CI: 1.03 to 2.33), full-time employment (AOR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.06 to 2.63), feeling at moderate/high risk of COVID-19 (AOR: 2.43; 95% CI: 1.70 to 3.47) and presence of individuals at risk of COVID-19 within the household (AOR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.78).ConclusionA majority of Nigerians agree with the concept of COVID-19 self-testing and would act to protect public health on self-testing positive. Self-test implementation research is necessary to frame how acceptability impacts uptake of preventive behaviours following a positive and a negative self-test result.

Project description:ObjectiveTo develop, pilot and refine a decision aid (ahead of a randomised trial evaluation) for women around age 50 facing their initial decision about whether to undergo mammography screening.DesignTwo-stage mixed-method pilot study including qualitative interviews (n=15) and a randomised comparison using a quantitative survey (n=34).SettingNew South Wales, Australia.ParticipantsWomen aged 43-59 years with no personal history of breast cancer.InterventionsThe decision aid provides evidence-based information about important outcomes of mammography screening over 20 years (breast cancer mortality reduction, overdetection and false positives) compared with no screening. The information is presented in a short booklet for women, combining text and visual formats. A control version produced for the purposes of comparison omits the overdetection-related content.OutcomesComprehension of key decision aid content and acceptability of the materials.ResultsMost women considered the decision aid clear and helpful and would recommend it to others. Nonetheless, the piloting process raised important issues that we tried to address in iterative revisions. Some participants found it hard to understand overdetection and why it is of concern, while there was often confusion about the distinction between overdetection and false positives. In a screening context, encountering balanced information rather than persuasion appears to be contrary to people's expectations, but women appreciated the opportunity to become better informed.ConclusionsThe concept of overdetection is complex and new to the public. This study highlights some key challenges for communicating about this issue. It is important to clarify that overdetection differs from false positives in terms of its more serious consequences (overtreatment and associated harms). Screening decision aids also must clearly explain their purpose of facilitating informed choice. A staged approach to development and piloting of decision aids is recommended to further improve understanding of overdetection and support informed decision-making about screening.

Project description:Elevated blood pressure is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and stroke but patients often discount recommended behavioral changes and prescribed medications. While effective interventions to promote adherence have been developed, cost-effectiveness from the patient's perspective, has not been well studied. The valuation of patient time and out of pocket expenses should be included while performing cost effectiveness evaluation. The Achieve BP study uses the contingent valuation method to assess willingness to accept (WTA) and willingness to pay (WTP) among patients with a history of uncontrolled blood pressure discharged from an urban emergency department and enrolled in a larger randomized controlled trial.WTA and WTP were assessed by asking patients a series of questions about time and travel costs and time value related to their study participation. A survey was conducted during the final study visit with patients to investigate the effectiveness of a kiosk-based educational intervention on blood pressure control. All study patients, regardless of study arm, received the same clinical protocol of commonly prescribed antihypertensive medication and met with research clinicians four times as part of the study procedures.Thirty-eight patients were offered the opportunity to participate in the cost-effectiveness study and all completed the survey. Statistical comparisons revealed these 38 patients were similar in representation to the entire RCT study population. All 38 (100.0%) were African-American, with an average age of 49.1 years; 55.3% were male, 21.1% were married, 78.9% had a high school or higher education, and 44.7% were working. 55.9% did not have a primary care provider and 50.0% did not have health insurance. Time price linear regression analysis was performed to estimate predictors of WTA and WTP.WTP and WTA may generate different results, and the elasticities were proportional to the estimated coefficients, with WTP about twice as responsive as WTA. An additional feature for health services research was successful piloting in a clinical setting of a brief patient-centered cost effectiveness survey.https://clinicaltrials.gov . Registration Number NCT02069015 . Registered February 19, 2014 (Retrospectively registered).