Cargando…
How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain
OBJECTIVES: To verify whether a citizens' jury study is feasible to the Andalusian population and to know if women, when better informed, are able to answer the research question of whether the Andalusian Public Health System must continue offering screening mammography to women aged 50–69. The...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5942446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29730621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019852 |
_version_ | 1783321473120731136 |
---|---|
author | Baena-Cañada, José M Luque-Ribelles, Violeta Quílez-Cutillas, Alicia Rosado-Varela, Petra Benítez-Rodríguez, Encarnación Márquez-Calderón, Soledad Rivera-Bautista, Juan Manuel |
author_facet | Baena-Cañada, José M Luque-Ribelles, Violeta Quílez-Cutillas, Alicia Rosado-Varela, Petra Benítez-Rodríguez, Encarnación Márquez-Calderón, Soledad Rivera-Bautista, Juan Manuel |
author_sort | Baena-Cañada, José M |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To verify whether a citizens' jury study is feasible to the Andalusian population and to know if women, when better informed, are able to answer the research question of whether the Andalusian Public Health System must continue offering screening mammography to women aged 50–69. The reasons for the pertinent decision and recommendations to the political authorities will be stated. DESIGN: Qualitative research study with the methodology of citizens' jury. SETTING: Breast cancer screening programme in Andalusia (Spain). PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen women aged 50–69 with secondary school or higher education accepted to participate as a jury. Two epidemiologists were the expert witnesses. The main researcher was the neutral moderator. INTERVENTIONS: Jury met on Monday, 15 February 2016. The moderator indicated to the jury that it had to assess the screening programme’s key benefits and main harm. On Tuesday, 16 February, the expert witnesses positioned for and against the programme. On Thursday, 18 February, the jury deliberated, reached final conclusions, submitted its vote and stated its recommendations to politicians. The deliberation session was transcribed and analysed with the support of ATLAS.ti.5.2 software. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility in the Andalusian population, women’s vote and opinion, reasons for votes and recommendations to political authorities. RESULTS: Eleven participants voted yes and two voted no. There are three reasons to vote ‘yes’: health, the test nature, and individual freedom. Some women invoke the lack of efficacy and the cost to justify their negative vote, at least in universal terms. On completion, they made suggestions to be submitted to the pertinent authorities for the improvement of information, psychology services and research. CONCLUSIONS: The deliberative strategy is feasible and causes a favourable positioning regarding screening mammography, although information changes the opinion of some women, who desire informed decision making and to keep or increase medicalisation in their lives. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5942446 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59424462018-05-11 How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain Baena-Cañada, José M Luque-Ribelles, Violeta Quílez-Cutillas, Alicia Rosado-Varela, Petra Benítez-Rodríguez, Encarnación Márquez-Calderón, Soledad Rivera-Bautista, Juan Manuel BMJ Open Qualitative Research OBJECTIVES: To verify whether a citizens' jury study is feasible to the Andalusian population and to know if women, when better informed, are able to answer the research question of whether the Andalusian Public Health System must continue offering screening mammography to women aged 50–69. The reasons for the pertinent decision and recommendations to the political authorities will be stated. DESIGN: Qualitative research study with the methodology of citizens' jury. SETTING: Breast cancer screening programme in Andalusia (Spain). PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen women aged 50–69 with secondary school or higher education accepted to participate as a jury. Two epidemiologists were the expert witnesses. The main researcher was the neutral moderator. INTERVENTIONS: Jury met on Monday, 15 February 2016. The moderator indicated to the jury that it had to assess the screening programme’s key benefits and main harm. On Tuesday, 16 February, the expert witnesses positioned for and against the programme. On Thursday, 18 February, the jury deliberated, reached final conclusions, submitted its vote and stated its recommendations to politicians. The deliberation session was transcribed and analysed with the support of ATLAS.ti.5.2 software. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility in the Andalusian population, women’s vote and opinion, reasons for votes and recommendations to political authorities. RESULTS: Eleven participants voted yes and two voted no. There are three reasons to vote ‘yes’: health, the test nature, and individual freedom. Some women invoke the lack of efficacy and the cost to justify their negative vote, at least in universal terms. On completion, they made suggestions to be submitted to the pertinent authorities for the improvement of information, psychology services and research. CONCLUSIONS: The deliberative strategy is feasible and causes a favourable positioning regarding screening mammography, although information changes the opinion of some women, who desire informed decision making and to keep or increase medicalisation in their lives. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5942446/ /pubmed/29730621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019852 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Qualitative Research Baena-Cañada, José M Luque-Ribelles, Violeta Quílez-Cutillas, Alicia Rosado-Varela, Petra Benítez-Rodríguez, Encarnación Márquez-Calderón, Soledad Rivera-Bautista, Juan Manuel How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain |
title | How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain |
title_full | How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain |
title_fullStr | How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain |
title_full_unstemmed | How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain |
title_short | How a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in Andalusia, Spain |
title_sort | how a deliberative approach includes women in the decisions of screening mammography: a citizens' jury feasibility study in andalusia, spain |
topic | Qualitative Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5942446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29730621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019852 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT baenacanadajosem howadeliberativeapproachincludeswomeninthedecisionsofscreeningmammographyacitizensjuryfeasibilitystudyinandalusiaspain AT luqueribellesvioleta howadeliberativeapproachincludeswomeninthedecisionsofscreeningmammographyacitizensjuryfeasibilitystudyinandalusiaspain AT quilezcutillasalicia howadeliberativeapproachincludeswomeninthedecisionsofscreeningmammographyacitizensjuryfeasibilitystudyinandalusiaspain AT rosadovarelapetra howadeliberativeapproachincludeswomeninthedecisionsofscreeningmammographyacitizensjuryfeasibilitystudyinandalusiaspain AT benitezrodriguezencarnacion howadeliberativeapproachincludeswomeninthedecisionsofscreeningmammographyacitizensjuryfeasibilitystudyinandalusiaspain AT marquezcalderonsoledad howadeliberativeapproachincludeswomeninthedecisionsofscreeningmammographyacitizensjuryfeasibilitystudyinandalusiaspain AT riverabautistajuanmanuel howadeliberativeapproachincludeswomeninthedecisionsofscreeningmammographyacitizensjuryfeasibilitystudyinandalusiaspain |