Dataset Information

The Modest Effects of Fact Boxes on Cancer Screening.

ABSTRACT: As health care becomes increasingly personalized to the needs and values of individual patients, informational interventions that aim to inform and debias consumer decision-making are likely to become important tools. In a randomized controlled experiment, we explore the effects of providing participants with published fact boxes on the benefits and harms of common cancer screening procedures. Female participants were surveyed about breast cancer screening by mammography, while male participants were surveyed about prostate cancer screening by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. For these screening procedures, we expect consumers to have overly optimistic prior beliefs about the benefits and harms. We find that participants update their beliefs about the net benefits of screening modestly, but we observe little change in their stated preferences to seek screening. Participants who scored higher on a numeracy test updated their beliefs about screening benefits more in response to the fact boxes than did participants who scored lower on the numeracy test.

SUBMITTER: Eber MR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8354090 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Modest Effects of Fact Boxes on Cancer Screening.

Eber Michael R MR Sunstein Cass R CR Hammitt James K JK Yeh Jennifer M JM

Journal of risk and uncertainty 20210217 1

As health care becomes increasingly personalized to the needs and values of individual patients, informational interventions that aim to inform and debias consumer decision-making are likely to become important tools. In a randomized controlled experiment, we explore the effects of providing participants with published fact boxes on the benefits and harms of common cancer screening procedures. Female participants were surveyed about breast cancer screening by mammography, while male participants ...[more]

PMID: 34385760

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveFor an effective control of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic with vaccines, most people in a population need to be vaccinated. It is thus important to know how to inform the public with reference to individual preferences-while also acknowledging the societal preference to encourage vaccinations. According to the health care standard of informed decision-making, a comparison of the benefits and harms of (not) having the vaccination would be required to inform undecided and skeptical people. To test evidence-based fact boxes, an established risk communication format, and to inform their development, we investigated their contribution to knowledge and evaluations of COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsWe conducted four studies (1, 2, and 4 were population-wide surveys with N = 1,942 to N = 6,056): Study 1 assessed the relationship between vaccination knowledge and intentions in Germany over three months. Study 2 assessed respective information gaps and needs of the population in Germany. In parallel, an experiment (Study 3) with a mixed design (presentation formats; pre-post-comparison) assessed the effect of fact boxes on risk perceptions and fear, using a convenience sample (N = 719). Study 4 examined how effective two fact box formats are for informing vaccination intentions, with a mixed experimental design: between-subjects (presentation formats) and within-subjects (pre-post-comparison).ResultsStudy 1 showed that vaccination knowledge and vaccination intentions increased between November 2020 and February 2021. Study 2 revealed objective information requirements and subjective information needs. Study 3 showed that the fact box format is effective in adjusting risk perceptions concerning COVID-19. Based on those results, fact boxes were revised and implemented with the help of a national health authority in Germany. Study 4 showed that simple fact boxes increase vaccination knowledge and positive evaluations in skeptics and undecideds.ConclusionFact boxes can inform COVID-19 vaccination intentions of undecided and skeptical people without threatening societal vaccination goals of the population.

Project description:Estrogen regulates bone mass in women and men, but the underlying cellular mechanisms of estrogen action on bone remain unclear. Although both estrogen receptor (ER)α and ERβ are expressed in bone cells, ERα is the dominant receptor for skeletal estrogen action. Previous studies using either global or cell-specific ERα deletion provided important insights, but each of these approaches had limitations. Specifically, either high circulating sex steroid levels in global ERα knockout mice or the effects of deletion of ERα during growth and development in constitutive cell-specific knockout mice have made it difficult to clearly define the role of ERα in specific cell types in the adult skeleton. We recently generated and characterized mice with tamoxifen-inducible ERα deletion in osteocytes driven by the 8-kb Dmp1 promoter (ERαΔOcy mice), revealing detrimental effects of osteocyte-specific ERα deletion on trabecular bone volume (-20.1%) and bone formation rate (-18.9%) in female, but not male, mice. Here, we developed and characterized analogous mice with inducible ERα deletion in osteoclasts using the Cathepsin K promoter (ERαΔOcl mice). In a study design identical to that with the previously described ERαΔOcy mice, adult female, but not male, ERαΔOcl mice showed a borderline (-10.2%, p = 0.084) reduction in trabecular bone volume, no change in osteoclast numbers, but a significant increase in serum CTx levels, consistent with increased osteoclast activity. These findings in ERαΔOcl mice differ from previous studies of constitutive osteoclast-specific ERα deletion, which led to clear deficits in trabecular bone and increased osteoclast numbers. Collectively, these data indicate that in adult mice, estrogen action in the osteocyte is likely more important than via the osteoclast and that ERα deletion in osteoclasts from conception onward has more dramatic skeletal effects than inducible osteoclastic ERα deletion in adult mice. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Dataset Information

The Modest Effects of Fact Boxes on Cancer Screening.

Publications

The Modest Effects of Fact Boxes on Cancer Screening.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets