Effects of a risk-based online mammography intervention on accuracy of perceived risk and mammography intentions. Issue 10 (October 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Seitz, Holli H.; Gibson, Laura; Skubisz, Christine; Forquer, Heather; Mello, Susan; Schapira, Marilyn M.; Armstrong, Katrina; Cappella, Joseph N.
• Is Part Of: Patient education and counseling. Volume 99:Issue 10(2016)
• Page Start: 1647
• Page End: 1656
• Publication Date: 2016-10
• Subjects: Risk communication -- Communication intervention -- Decision aid -- Mammography -- Perceived risk -- Numeracy; Patient education -- Periodicals; Health counseling -- Periodicals; Health education -- Periodicals; Counseling -- Periodicals; Patient Education -- Periodicals; Éducation des patients -- Périodiques; Counseling -- Périodiques; Éducation sanitaire -- Périodiques; 615.5071
• DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.05.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0738-3991

Abstract

Highlights: We developed and tested a risk-based mammography decision intervention. Match between objective estimates of BC risk and mammography intentions improved. Accuracy of breast cancer risk perceptions increased. Effects on risk perceptions were more pronounced for high-numeracy women. Abstract: Objective: This experiment tested the effects of an individualized risk-based online mammography decision intervention. The intervention employs exemplification theory and the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion to improve the match between breast cancer risk and mammography intentions. Methods: 2918 women ages 35–49 were stratified into two levels of 10-year breast cancer risk (<1.5%; ≥1.5%) then randomly assigned to one of eight conditions: two comparison conditions and six risk-based intervention conditions that varied according to a 2 (amount of content: brief vs. extended) x 3 (format: expository vs. untailored exemplar [example case] vs. tailored exemplar) design. Outcomes included mammography intentions and accuracy of perceived breast cancer risk. Results: Risk-based intervention conditions improved the match between objective risk estimates and perceived risk, especially for high-numeracy women with a 10-year breast cancer risk ≤1.5%. For women with a risk ≤1.5%, exemplars improved accuracy of perceived risk and all risk-based interventions increased intentions to wait until age 50 to screen. Conclusion: A risk-based mammography intervention improved accuracy of perceived risk and the match between objective risk estimates and mammography intentions. Practice implications: Interventions could be applied in online or clinical settings to help women understand risk and make mammography decisions.