Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2016-8
The associations between objective numeracy and colorectal cancer screening knowledge,attitudes and defensive processing in a deprived community sample
We examined associations between numeracy and sociocognitive factors associated with colorectal cancer screening uptake (n = 964). Nearly half (45.7%) of the respondents incorrectly answered a numeracy question (low numeracy). Low numeracy respondents were less knowledgeable about colorectal cancer (p < .001), less positive towards screening (emotional, p < .001 and practical, p = .001) and less likely to intend to participate in screening (p = .001). They also reported greater defensive processing of cancer information (p = .001). Sociocognitive factors fully mediated the relationship between numeracy and screening intention. Addressing numeracy issues may reduce inequalities in CRC screening participation, but communication strategies could be limited by the tendency process cancer information defensively.
AtkinWEdwardsRKralj-HansI. (2010) Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: A multicentre randomised controlled trial. The Lancet375(9726): 1624–1633.
2.
BoxellESmithSGMorrisM. (2012) Increasing awareness of gynaecological cancer symptoms and reducing barriers to medical help seeking: Does health literacy play a role?Journal of Health Communication17(S3): S265–S279.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010) Vital signs: Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 50–75 years – United States, 2008 (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm59e0706.pdf
5.
ConnerMNormanP (2005) Predicting Health Behaviour Research and Practice with Social Cognition Models. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
6.
DavisTCArnoldCLBennettCL. (2014) Strategies to improve repeat fecal occult blood testing cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention23(1): 134–143.
7.
DolanNCFerreiraMRDavisTC. (2004) Colorectal cancer screening knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs among veterans: Does literacy make a difference?Journal of Clinical Oncology22(13): 2617–2622.
8.
EstacioEVComingsJ (2013) Health literacy: Exploring future directions and potential contributions from health psychology. Journal of Health Psychology18(8): 997–1003.
9.
GoulardHBoussac-ZarebskaMAncelle-ParkR. (2008) French colorectal cancer screening pilot programme: Results of the first round. Journal of Medical Screening15(3): 143–148.
10.
HowellJLShepperdJA (2013) Reducing health-information avoidance through contemplation. Psychological Science24(9): 1696–1703.
11.
Institute of Medicine (2004) Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
12.
JonesRMDeversKJKuzelAJ. (2010) Patient-reported barriers to colorectal cancer screening: A mixed-methods analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine38(5): 508–516.
13.
KatičićMAntoljakNKujundžićM. (2012) Results of national colorectal cancer screening program in Croatia (2007-2011). World Journal of Gastroenterology18(32): 4300–4307.
14.
KiviniemiMTBennettAZaiterM. (2011) Individual-level factors in colorectal cancer screening: A review of the literature on the relation of individual-level health behavior constructs and screening behavior. Psycho-Oncology20(10): 1023–1033.
15.
KobayashiLCWardleJvon WagnerC (2014) Limited health literacy is a barrier to colorectal cancer screening in England: Evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Preventive Medicine61: 100–105.
16.
McQueenAVernonSWSwankPR (2013) Construct definition and scale development for defensive information processing: An application to colorectal cancer screening. Health Psychology32: 190–202.
17.
MilesAVoorwindenSChapmanS. (2008) Psychologic predictors of cancer information avoidance among older adults: The role of cancer fear and fatalism. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention17(8): 1872–1879.
18.
MossSMCampbellCMeliaJ. (2012) Performance measures in three rounds of the English bowel cancer screening pilot. Gut61(1): 101–107.
19.
MullenPDAllenJDGlanzK. (2006) Measures used in studies of informed decision making about cancer screening: A systematic review. Annals of Behavioral Medicine32(3): 188–201.
20.
NelsonWLMoserRPHanPKJ (2013) Exploring objective and subjective numeracy at a population level: Findings from the 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Journal of Health Communication18(2): 192–205.
21.
OldachBRKatzML (2014) Health literacy and cancer screening: A systematic review. Patient Education and Counseling94(2): 149–157.
22.
OsbornCYCavanaughKWallstonKA. (2010) Self-efficacy links health literacy and numeracy to glycemic control. Journal of Health Communication15(Suppl. 2): 146–158.
23.
ParkerRMBakerDWWilliamsMV. (1995) The Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults. Journal of General Internal Medicine10(10): 537–541.
24.
PeacockOClaytonSAtkinsonF. (2013) ‘Be clear on cancer’: The impact of the UK National Bowel Cancer Awareness Campaign. Colorectal Disease15(8): 963–967.
25.
PetersonNBDwyerKAMulvaneySA. (2007) The influence of health literacy on colorectal cancer screening knowledge, beliefs and behavior. Journal of the National Medical Association99(10): 1105–1112.
26.
PowerAMTalleyNJFordAC (2013) Association between constipation and colorectal cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. The American Journal of Gastroenterology108(6): 894–903.
ReynaVFNelsonWLHanPK. (2009) How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychological Bulletin135(6): 943–973.
29.
RobbKACampbellJEvansP. (2008a) Impact of risk information on perceived colorectal cancer risk: A randomized trial. Journal of Health Psychology13(6): 744–753.
30.
RobbKAPowerEAtkinW. (2008b) Ethnic differences in participation in flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in the UK. Journal of Medical Screening15(3): 130–136.
31.
RuddR (2013) Needed action in health literacy. Journal of Health Psychology18(8): 1004–1010.
32.
SmithSGRaineRObichereA. (2014a) The effect of a supplementary (‘gist-based’) information leaflet on colorectal cancer knowledge and screening intention: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. Epub ahead of print 25 September 2014. DOI: 10.1007/s10865-014-9596-z.
33.
SmithSGRendellHGeorgeH. (2014b) Improving cancer control through a community-based cancer awareness initiative. Preventive Medicine60: 121–123.
34.
SmithSGVartGWolfMS. (2013a) How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: Observations from a think-aloud study. Health Expectations. Epub ahead of print 5 August 2013. DOI: 10.1111/hex.12117.
35.
SmithSGWolfMSvon WagnerC (2010) Socioeconomic status, statistical confidence, and patient-provider communication: An analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2007). Journal of Health Communication15(Suppl. 3): 169–185.
36.
SmithSGWolfMSObichereA. (2013b) The development and testing of a brief (‘gist-based’) supplementary colorectal cancer screening information leaflet. Patient Education and Counseling93(3): 619–625.
37.
SmithSKBarrattATrevenaL. (2012) A theoretical framework for measuring knowledge in screening decision aid trials. Patient Education and Counseling89(2): 330–336.
38.
SmithSKNutbeamDMcCafferyKJ (2013c) Insights into the concept and measurement of health literacy from a study of shared decision-making in a low literacy population. Journal of Health Psychology18(8): 1011–1022.
39.
SteeleRJCKostourouIMcClementsP. (2010) Effect of gender, age and deprivation on key performance indicators in a FOBT-based colorectal screening programme. Journal of Medical Screening17(2): 68–74.
40.
U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group (2013) United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2009 Incidence and Mortality Web-Based Report. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Available at: www.cdc.gov/uscs
41.
VartGBanziRMinozziS (2012) Comparing participation rates between immunochemical and guaiac faecal occult blood tests: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prevent-ive medicine55(2): 87–92.
42.
ViswanathK (2005) The communications revolution and cancer control. Nature Reviews Cancer5(10): 828–835.
43.
von WagnerCBaioGRaineR. (2011a) Inequalities in participation in an organized national colorectal cancer screening programme: Results from the first 2.6 million invitations in England. International Journal of Epidemiology40(3): 712–718.
44.
von WagnerCGoodASmithSG. (2012) Responses to procedural information about colorectal cancer screening using faecal occult blood testing: The role of consideration of future consequences. Health Expectations15: 176–186.
45.
von WagnerCGoodAWhitakerKL. (2011b) Psychosocial determinants of socioeconomic inequalities in cancer screening participation: A conceptual framework. Epidemiologic Reviews33(1): 135–147.
46.
von WagnerCSteptoeAWolfMS. (2008) Health literacy and health actions: A review and a framework from health psychology. Health Education & Behavior36: 860–877.
47.
WeissBDMaysMZMartzW. (2005) Quick assessment of literacy in primary care: The newest vital sign. The Annals of Family Medicine3(6): 514–522.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
