Understanding Affective Processing of Scientific Evidence to Promote Informed Choice for Breast Cancer Screening
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Enrollment
- 637
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Reactance
Study Overview
Brief Summary
Identify the prevalence and predictors of reactance, self-exemption, disbelief, source derogation in reaction to evidence about mammography benefits and harms, and consequences for decision-making and trust.
Detailed Description
In this study, the goal is to identify the prevalence and predictors of reactance, self-exemption, disbelief, and source derogation in reaction to evidence about mammography benefits and harms, and consequences for decision-making and trust. Research has not yet systematically identified the proportion of women who respond negatively (vs. positively) to evidence about the benefits and harms of mammography screening, or attempted to explain these responses by examining theory-driven predictors. The Investigator will develop and conduct a probability-based nationally representative survey in which mammography evidence is communicated using current best practices in risk communication. The Investigators will identify theory-driven predictors of negative and positive responses to that evidence, and identify consequences of these responses for screening decision-making and trust.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Observational
- Observational Model
- Cohort
- Time Perspective
- Prospective
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 39 Years to 49 Years (Adult)
- Sex
- Female
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Between 39-49 years of age
- •No history of breast cancer
- •No known BRCA 1/2 mutation
Exclusion Criteria
- •Non-English or Spanish Speaking
- •Persons unable to provide informed consent (e.g. sever dementia or cognitive disability or illiterate
- •History of breast cancer
- •Known BRCA 1/2 mutation
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Reactance
Time Frame: 24 hours
In response to mammography evidence, feeling that the information is manipulative or biased. 4 questions total, each on a 7 point Likert scale, with mean scores that range from 1 to 5. Higher mean scores reflect greater reactance.
Disbelief
Time Frame: 24 hours
In response to mammography evidence, feeling that the evidence is not accurate or believable. 4 questions total, each on a 5 point Likert scale, with mean scores that range from 1 to 5. Higher mean score reflects more disbelief in the information.
Source Derogation
Time Frame: 24 hours
In response to mammography evidence, feeling that the source of the evidence is not trustworthy or competent. 4 questions total, each on a 5 point Likert scale, with mean scores that range from 1 to 5. Higher mean score reflects more source derogation.
Self Exemption
Time Frame: 24 hours
Feeling that mammography evidence is not relevant to oneself.34 questions total, each on a 5 point Likert scale, with mean scores that range from 1 to 5. Higher mean scores indicate greater belief that the information is not self relevant.
Screening Intentions
Time Frame: 24 hours
Intentions to engage in mammography screening. Options will include: 1. I am planning to start/continue having regular mammograms this year. 2. I am planning to wait until I'm older but before age 50 to have my first/next mammogram. 3. I am planning to wait until I am 50 to have my first/next mammogram. 4. I am not planning to have a mammogram in the future at any age
Secondary Outcomes
- Medical Mistrust Scale (Eaton et al., 2015)(24 hours)