Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWeitzman, Elissa R.
dc.contributor.authorZapka, Jane G.
dc.contributor.authorEstabrook, Barbara B.
dc.contributor.authorGoins, Karin V
dc.date2022-08-11T08:09:22.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T16:27:57Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T16:27:57Z
dc.date.issued2001-06-08
dc.date.submitted2011-12-09
dc.identifier.citationPrev Med. 2001 Jun;32(6):502-13. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2001.0838">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn0091-7435 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1006/pmed.2001.0838
dc.identifier.pmid11394954
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/36907
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: Screening to detect and prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) is well below optimal, contributing to needless CRC-related morbidity and mortality. Little detailed information exists explaining why screening technologies are underutilized and why screening adherence rates are low. Prior to the design of an intervention study, we assessed knowledge about CRC among adult women and men with access to health care. We also investigated patterns of perceived risk for CRC, barriers and facilitators to screening, and experience and intentions with regard to both fecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy. METHODS: We analyzed data from semistructured focus group interviews with a small, nonrepresentative sample (n = 39) of community-dwelling adult men and women ages 50 to 64 and 65 plus. RESULTS: CRC-related knowledge is low, and misperceptions are common. Provider practices reinforce low levels of perceived risk. Multiple barriers to screening exist, of which many are remediable. CONCLUSIONS: We are at an early stage in the diffusion of information about CRC. Screening utilization may be improved through development of appropriate public health awareness campaigns and by addressing service factors. Recommendations are provided.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=11394954&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2001.0838
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectColorectal Neoplasms
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectFocus Groups
dc.subject*Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subject*Occult Blood
dc.subjectPatient Acceptance of Health Care
dc.subjectPhysician's Practice Patterns
dc.subjectRisk Factors
dc.subjectSigmoidoscopy
dc.subjectUnited States
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.subjectPrimary Care
dc.titleRisk and reluctance: understanding impediments to colorectal cancer screening
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitlePreventive medicine
dc.source.volume32
dc.source.issue6
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/meyers_pp/289
dc.identifier.contextkey2396649
html.description.abstract<p>PURPOSE: Screening to detect and prevent colorectal cancer (CRC) is well below optimal, contributing to needless CRC-related morbidity and mortality. Little detailed information exists explaining why screening technologies are underutilized and why screening adherence rates are low. Prior to the design of an intervention study, we assessed knowledge about CRC among adult women and men with access to health care. We also investigated patterns of perceived risk for CRC, barriers and facilitators to screening, and experience and intentions with regard to both fecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy.</p> <p>METHODS: We analyzed data from semistructured focus group interviews with a small, nonrepresentative sample (n = 39) of community-dwelling adult men and women ages 50 to 64 and 65 plus.</p> <p>RESULTS: CRC-related knowledge is low, and misperceptions are common. Provider practices reinforce low levels of perceived risk. Multiple barriers to screening exist, of which many are remediable.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: We are at an early stage in the diffusion of information about CRC. Screening utilization may be improved through development of appropriate public health awareness campaigns and by addressing service factors. Recommendations are provided.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathmeyers_pp/289
dc.contributor.departmentMeyers Primary Care Institute
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Medicine, Division of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine
dc.source.pages502-13


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record