How Do Women Interpret the NHS Information Leaflet about Cervical Cancer Screening?

Yasmina Okan, Dafina Petrova, Samuel G. Smith, Vedran Lesic and Wändi Bruine de Bruin
Additional contact information
Yasmina Okan: Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Dafina Petrova: Cancer Registry of Granada, Andalusian School of Public Health, Granada, Spain
Samuel G. Smith: Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, UK
Vedran Lesic: Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Wändi Bruine de Bruin: Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Medical Decision Making, 2019, vol. 39, issue 7, 738-754

Abstract: Background. Organized screening programs often rely on written materials to inform the public. In the United Kingdom, women invited for cervical cancer screening receive a leaflet from the National Health Service (NHS) to support screening decisions. However, information about screening may be too complex for people to understand, potentially hindering informed decision making. Objectives. We aimed to identify women’s difficulties in interpreting the leaflet used in England and negative and positive responses to the leaflet. Methods. We used a sequential mixed-methods design involving 2 steps: cognitive think-aloud interviews ( n = 20), followed by an England-wide survey ( n = 602). Data were collected between June 2017 and December 2018, and participants included women aged 25 to 64 y with varying sociodemographics. Results. Interview results revealed misunderstandings concerning screening results, benefits, and additional tests and treatment, although participants tended to react positively to numerical information. Participants were often unfamiliar with the potential harms associated with screening (i.e., screening risks), key aspects of human papillomavirus, and complex terms (e.g., dyskaryosis ). Survey results indicated that interpretation difficulties were common ( M correct items = 12.5 of 23). Lower understanding was associated with lower educational level (β’s >0.15, P ’s

Keywords: cancer screening; cervical cancer; informed decision making; patient information; risk communication (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X19873647 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:7:p:738-754

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X19873647

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().