Changes in Risk Perceptions in Relation to Self-Reported Colorectal Cancer Screening Among First-Degree Relatives of Colorectal Cancer Cases Enrolled in a Randomized Trial
Changes in Risk Perceptions in Relation to Self-Reported Colorectal Cancer Screening Among First-Degree Relatives of Colorectal Cancer Cases Enrolled in a Randomized Trial
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0024288
复制
发表时间：
2011-07-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Bastani, Roshan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Glenn, Beth A.;Herrmann, Alison K.;Bastani, Roshan
目的：通过二次数据分析来评估风险再评估假说的适用性，该假说被用来解释实施健康行为对感知风险的影响。数据是在随机试验的背景下收集的，该试验发现，在增加结直肠癌病例的一级亲属中的结直肠癌(CRC)筛查方面，一种个性化的、多成分的干预措施是成功的。方法：种族多元化的研究样本(N=841；29%拉丁裔，21%非裔美国人，20%亚裔)由成年兄弟姐妹和儿童(40-80岁)组成，这些病例是通过加州癌症登记处确认的。在基线和6个月和12个月的随访时收集数据。在研究期间，与研究条件和筛查状态相关的自我报告风险知觉的变化(获知的发生结直肠癌的可能性)被检查。结果：在研究期间，与对照组参与者相比，干预组参与者的感知风险增加更多，但增加仅限于未经筛查的干预组参与者。我们还检查了与筛查收到的时间相关的感知风险的轨迹(例如，在6个月之前，6-12个月，从不)。在研究期间，观察到没有在研究期间进行筛查的干预参与者的风险持续上升。相比之下，接受6个月筛查的参与者在6个月至12个月的随访期内，感知风险有所降低或趋于平稳。结论：研究结果支持风险重新评估假说在参加结直肠癌筛查推广试验的高危样本中的适用性。需要进一步的研究来探索短期风险降低对未来结直肠癌筛查行为的影响。
Objective: This secondary data analysis was conducted to evaluate the applicability of the Risk Reappraisal Hypothesis, which has been proposed to explain the influence of performing a health behavior on perceived risk. Data were collected in the context of a randomized trial, which found that an individually tailored, multicomponent intervention was successful in increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among first-degree relatives of CRC cases. Method: The ethnically diverse study sample (N = 841; 29% Latino, 21% African American, 20% Asian) consisted of adult siblings and children (40-80 years) of CRC cases, identified through the California Cancer Registry. Data were collected at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Changes in self-reported risk perception (perceived likelihood of developing CRC) were examined over the study period in relation to study condition and screening status. Results: Greater increases in perceived risk were observed among intervention versus control-group participants over the study period, but increases were limited to intervention participants who had not been screened. We also examined trajectories of perceived risk in relation to timing of screening receipt (e.g., before 6 months, 6-12 months, never). Continued upward shifts in risk were observed during the study period among intervention participants not screened during the study. In contrast, participants screened by 6 months displayed a reduction or leveling off in perceived risk between 6- and 12-month follow-up. Conclusion: Results provide support for the applicability of the Risk Reappraisal Hypothesis within a high-risk sample enrolled in a CRC screening promotion trial. Future research is needed to explore the impact of short-term risk reductions on future CRC screening behavior.