Cargando…

Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND: Our study examined the use of decision-making styles, as identified by Scott and Bruce (1995) (i.e. differentiating between a rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous decision-making style), within the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In the fie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Douma, Linda N., Uiters, Ellen, Timmermans, Danielle R. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6998095/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32014059
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-0381-1
_version_ 1783493803793973248
author Douma, Linda N.
Uiters, Ellen
Timmermans, Danielle R. M.
author_facet Douma, Linda N.
Uiters, Ellen
Timmermans, Danielle R. M.
author_sort Douma, Linda N.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Our study examined the use of decision-making styles, as identified by Scott and Bruce (1995) (i.e. differentiating between a rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous decision-making style), within the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In the field of cancer screening, informed decision-making is considered important, which follows the Rational Decision model. Subsequently, gaining more insight into decision-making styles being used in real life, could improve support to people when making their screening decision. In addition, we examined whether the decision-making style that people used was associated with their experienced decisional conflict. METHODS: An online survey was carried out among a sample of first-time CRC screening invitees (1282 respondents, response rate 49%). We assessed people’s decision-making styles, CRC screening participation, education level, self-reported health literacy, and decisional conflict, and examined the possible associations between them. RESULTS: In our study, people who had to decide about CRC screening scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. Respondents scoring higher on using a spontaneous or dependent decision-making style were more likely to have participated in CRC screening, while respondents scoring higher on using an avoidant decision-making style were more likely not to have participated in CRC screening. However, differences were small. Generally, people in our study experienced low decisional conflict. CONCLUSION: Our eligible CRC screening population scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. To optimise support to people, public education materials could be appealing more to the intuitive processes at hand. That being said, the current education materials aimed at informed/rational decision-making do not necessarily seem to create a problem, as people generally experienced low decisional conflict. Possible concerns regarding the use of a spontaneous, dependent or avoidant decision-making style could be that these styles might be contributing to less informed decisions. However, it is relevant to consider that the found differences are small and that any possible concern applies to a relatively small group of people.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6998095
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69980952020-02-10 Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening Douma, Linda N. Uiters, Ellen Timmermans, Danielle R. M. BMC Psychol Research Article BACKGROUND: Our study examined the use of decision-making styles, as identified by Scott and Bruce (1995) (i.e. differentiating between a rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous decision-making style), within the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In the field of cancer screening, informed decision-making is considered important, which follows the Rational Decision model. Subsequently, gaining more insight into decision-making styles being used in real life, could improve support to people when making their screening decision. In addition, we examined whether the decision-making style that people used was associated with their experienced decisional conflict. METHODS: An online survey was carried out among a sample of first-time CRC screening invitees (1282 respondents, response rate 49%). We assessed people’s decision-making styles, CRC screening participation, education level, self-reported health literacy, and decisional conflict, and examined the possible associations between them. RESULTS: In our study, people who had to decide about CRC screening scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. Respondents scoring higher on using a spontaneous or dependent decision-making style were more likely to have participated in CRC screening, while respondents scoring higher on using an avoidant decision-making style were more likely not to have participated in CRC screening. However, differences were small. Generally, people in our study experienced low decisional conflict. CONCLUSION: Our eligible CRC screening population scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. To optimise support to people, public education materials could be appealing more to the intuitive processes at hand. That being said, the current education materials aimed at informed/rational decision-making do not necessarily seem to create a problem, as people generally experienced low decisional conflict. Possible concerns regarding the use of a spontaneous, dependent or avoidant decision-making style could be that these styles might be contributing to less informed decisions. However, it is relevant to consider that the found differences are small and that any possible concern applies to a relatively small group of people. BioMed Central 2020-02-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6998095/ /pubmed/32014059 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-0381-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Douma, Linda N.
Uiters, Ellen
Timmermans, Danielle R. M.
Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening
title Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening
title_full Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening
title_fullStr Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening
title_full_unstemmed Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening
title_short Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening
title_sort decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6998095/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32014059
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-0381-1
work_keys_str_mv AT doumalindan decisionmakingstylesinthecontextofcolorectalcancerscreening
AT uitersellen decisionmakingstylesinthecontextofcolorectalcancerscreening
AT timmermansdaniellerm decisionmakingstylesinthecontextofcolorectalcancerscreening