Cargando…
How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study
BACKGROUND: The English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme biennially invites individuals aged 60–74 to participate in screening. The booklet, ‘Bowel Cancer Screening: The Facts' accompanies this invitation. Its primary aim is to inform potential participants about the aims, advantages and di...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5060830/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23910930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12117 |
_version_ | 1782459525728567296 |
---|---|
author | Smith, Samuel G. Vart, Gemma Wolf, Michael S. Obichere, Austin Baker, Helen J. Raine, Rosalind Wardle, Jane von Wagner, Christian |
author_facet | Smith, Samuel G. Vart, Gemma Wolf, Michael S. Obichere, Austin Baker, Helen J. Raine, Rosalind Wardle, Jane von Wagner, Christian |
author_sort | Smith, Samuel G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme biennially invites individuals aged 60–74 to participate in screening. The booklet, ‘Bowel Cancer Screening: The Facts' accompanies this invitation. Its primary aim is to inform potential participants about the aims, advantages and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: To provide detailed commentary on how individuals process the information contained within ‘The Facts’ booklet. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study comprised of 18 interviews with individuals aged 45–60 and used a ‘think‐aloud’ paradigm in which participants read aloud the booklet. Participant utterances (verbal statements made in response to researcher‐led prompts) were transcribed and analysed using a combination of content and thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 776 coded utterances were analysed (mean = 43.1 per person; range = 8–95). While overall comprehension was satisfactory, several problem areas were identified such as the use of complex unfamiliar terminology and the presentation of numerical information. Specific sections such as colonoscopy risk information evoked negative emotional responses. Participants made several suggestions for ways in which comprehension might be improved. CONCLUSION: Public perceptions of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme information materials indicated that specific aspects of the booklet were difficult to process. These materials may be an appropriate target to improve public understanding of the aims, benefits and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening. These findings will contribute to a broader NIHR‐funded project that aims to design a supplementary ‘gist‐based’ information leaflet suitable for low literacy populations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5060830 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50608302016-12-07 How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study Smith, Samuel G. Vart, Gemma Wolf, Michael S. Obichere, Austin Baker, Helen J. Raine, Rosalind Wardle, Jane von Wagner, Christian Health Expect Original Research Papers BACKGROUND: The English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme biennially invites individuals aged 60–74 to participate in screening. The booklet, ‘Bowel Cancer Screening: The Facts' accompanies this invitation. Its primary aim is to inform potential participants about the aims, advantages and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: To provide detailed commentary on how individuals process the information contained within ‘The Facts’ booklet. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study comprised of 18 interviews with individuals aged 45–60 and used a ‘think‐aloud’ paradigm in which participants read aloud the booklet. Participant utterances (verbal statements made in response to researcher‐led prompts) were transcribed and analysed using a combination of content and thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 776 coded utterances were analysed (mean = 43.1 per person; range = 8–95). While overall comprehension was satisfactory, several problem areas were identified such as the use of complex unfamiliar terminology and the presentation of numerical information. Specific sections such as colonoscopy risk information evoked negative emotional responses. Participants made several suggestions for ways in which comprehension might be improved. CONCLUSION: Public perceptions of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme information materials indicated that specific aspects of the booklet were difficult to process. These materials may be an appropriate target to improve public understanding of the aims, benefits and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening. These findings will contribute to a broader NIHR‐funded project that aims to design a supplementary ‘gist‐based’ information leaflet suitable for low literacy populations. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2013-08-05 2015-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5060830/ /pubmed/23910930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12117 Text en © 2013 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Papers Smith, Samuel G. Vart, Gemma Wolf, Michael S. Obichere, Austin Baker, Helen J. Raine, Rosalind Wardle, Jane von Wagner, Christian How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study |
title | How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study |
title_full | How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study |
title_fullStr | How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study |
title_full_unstemmed | How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study |
title_short | How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study |
title_sort | how do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study |
topic | Original Research Papers |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5060830/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23910930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12117 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT smithsamuelg howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy AT vartgemma howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy AT wolfmichaels howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy AT obichereaustin howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy AT bakerhelenj howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy AT rainerosalind howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy AT wardlejane howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy AT vonwagnerchristian howdopeopleinterpretinformationaboutcolorectalcancerscreeningobservationsfromathinkaloudstudy |