African American Men's Understanding and Perceptions About Prostate Cancer: Why Multiple Dimensions of Health Literacy are Important in Cancer Communication
African American Men's Understanding and Perceptions About Prostate Cancer: Why Multiple Dimensions of Health Literacy are Important in Cancer Communication
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10900-009-9167-3
复制
发表时间：
2009-10-01
影响因子：
5.9
通讯作者：
Rose, India D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Friedman, Daniela B.;Corwin, Sara J.;Rose, India D.
前列腺癌（PrCA）是美国男性中诊断最多的癌症，尤其是非洲裔美国人（AA）男性。本形成性研究的目的是探讨应用Nutbeam的多维健康素养框架的影响AA男人的理解PrCA信息。参与者为25名45岁及以上的AA男性，来自南卡罗来纳州。他们的功能性健康素养的评估使用两个修改完形填空测试和功能性健康素养的成人（S-TOFHLA）缩短测试。男性还参加了访谈或焦点小组，在此期间，他们被问及有关PrCA风险，预防和筛查的问题。对转录本进行审查，以确定重复出现的主题，并使用NVivo 7进行定性分析。平均S-TOFHLA为28.28（+/- 1.98），意味着“充分”理解。8级文件的平均完形填空为0.71（+/-0.05），13级文件的平均完形填空为0.66（+/-0.04），也显示出“足够的”理解。受教育程度较低的参与者8年级资源的完形填空得分较低（P = .047）。尽管识字测试成绩令人满意，但访谈和焦点小组的结果显示，参与者对PrCA风险的理解和误解有限。许多人希望获得有关筛查和家族史的信息，这些信息是由AA妇女和教会牧师口口相传的，因为他们中很少有人收到或积极寻求PrCA资源。使用Nutbeam的框架，在访谈和焦点小组中出现了健康素养的差距，这些差距没有被经过验证的工具充分捕捉。研究结果为PrCA与AA男性的沟通提供了重要的启示，以纠正对癌症风险的误解并激励预防行为。
Prostate cancer (PrCA) is the most diagnosed cancer among men in the United States, especially among African American (AA) men. The purpose of this formative study was to explore the implications of applying Nutbeam's multidimensional health literacy framework to AA men's understanding of PrCA information. Participants were 25 AA men aged 45 and older in South Carolina. Their functional health literacy was assessed using two modified Cloze tests and the Shortened Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA). Men also participated in interviews or focus groups during which they were asked questions about PrCA risk, prevention, and screening. Transcripts were reviewed for recurrent themes and analyzed qualitatively using NVivo7. Mean S-TOFHLA was 28.28 (+/- 1.98), implying "adequate" comprehension. Mean Cloze was .71 (+/-.05) for a Grade 8 document and .66 (+/-.04) for a Grade 13 document, also showing "adequate" comprehension. Cloze scores for the Grade 8 resource were lower for participants with less education (P = .047). Despite having satisfactory literacy test scores, results from interviews and focus groups revealed participants' limited understanding and misconceptions about PrCA risk. Many wanted information about screening and family history delivered word-of-mouth by AA women and church pastors as few of them had ever received or actively sought out PrCA resources. Using Nutbeam's framework, gaps in health literacy which were not adequately captured by the validated tools emerged during the interviews and focus groups. Study findings provide important implications for PrCA communication with AA men to correct misperceptions about cancer risk and motivate preventive behaviors.