IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i23p12333-d686583.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genetic Testing Improve Gynecological Cancer Screening Uptake among Never-Screened Attendees? A Randomized Controlled Study

Author

Listed:
  • Miki Watanabe

    (Department of Public Health, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya 467-8601, Japan)

  • Satoyo Hosono

    (Department of Public Health, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya 467-8601, Japan
    Division of Cancer Screening Assessment and Management, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan)

  • Hiroko Nakagawa-Senda

    (Department of Public Health, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya 467-8601, Japan)

  • Sachiyo Yamamoto

    (Health Promotion Division, Okazaki City Public Health Center, Okazaki 444-8545, Japan)

  • Masami Aoyama

    (Health Promotion Division, Okazaki City Public Health Center, Okazaki 444-8545, Japan)

  • Satoru Hattori

    (Okazaki City Public Health Center, Okazaki 444-8545, Japan)

  • Tamaki Yamada

    (Okazaki City Medical Association, Public Health Center, Okazaki 444-0875, Japan)

  • Sadao Suzuki

    (Department of Public Health, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya 467-8601, Japan)

Abstract

The clinical impact of direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) on health behavior change has remained controversial. The aim of this study is to clarify the short-term effects of DTC-GT on gynecological cancer screening uptake among middle-aged never-screened Japanese women in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). A total of 144 women aged 45–50 who had never undergone gynecological cancer screening were randomly selected to receive health education (control group), or health education and DTC-GT (intervention group), at a 1:1 ratio. We compared the gynecological screening uptake during the follow-up period. Furthermore, to estimate the impact of learning of an elevated genetic cancer risk in the intervention group, we conducted an analysis dichotomized by genetic risk category. A total of 139 women completed the one-year follow-up survey (69 in the control group and 70 in the intervention group). The follow-up period did not differ between control and intervention groups (the median follow-up period was 276 days and 279 days, respectively, p = 0.746). There were 7 (9.7%) women in the control group and 10 (13.9%) in the intervention group who attended breast cancer screening ( p = 0.606), and 9 (12.5%) women from both groups attended cervical cancer screening ( p = 1.000). Likewise, there were no significant differences in cancer screening uptake in the analysis stratified by risk category within the intervention group. In conclusion, there was no significant effect of DTC-GT on gynecological cancer screening uptake in this RCT setting. Increasing cancer screening attendance may require a combination of well-established intervention strategies and DTC-GT. Clinical Trial Registration: UMIN-CTR Identifier, UMIN000031709.

Suggested Citation

  • Miki Watanabe & Satoyo Hosono & Hiroko Nakagawa-Senda & Sachiyo Yamamoto & Masami Aoyama & Satoru Hattori & Tamaki Yamada & Sadao Suzuki, 2021. "Does Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genetic Testing Improve Gynecological Cancer Screening Uptake among Never-Screened Attendees? A Randomized Controlled Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-10, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12333-:d:686583
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12333/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12333/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Siew-Kee Low & Atsushi Takahashi & Kyota Ashikawa & Johji Inazawa & Yoshio Miki & Michiaki Kubo & Yusuke Nakamura & Toyomasa Katagiri, 2013. "Genome-Wide Association Study of Breast Cancer in the Japanese Population," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-8, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    2. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    3. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    4. Alsalem, Amani & Fry, Marie-Louise & Thaichon, Park, 2020. "To donate or to waste it: Understanding posthumous organ donation attitude," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 87-97.
    5. Benoît Lécureux & Adrien Bonnet & Ouassim Manout & Jaâfar Berrada & Louafi Bouzouina, 2022. "Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review of stated choice experiments," Working Papers hal-03814947, HAL.
    6. Kristin Thomas & Evalill Nilsson & Karin Festin & Pontus Henriksson & Mats Lowén & Marie Löf & Margareta Kristenson, 2020. "Associations of Psychosocial Factors with Multiple Health Behaviors: A Population-Based Study of Middle-Aged Men and Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Kamruzzaman, Md. & Baker, Douglas & Washington, Simon & Turrell, Gavin, 2013. "Residential dissonance and mode choice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 12-28.
    8. Ficko, Andrej & Boncina, Andrej, 2013. "Probabilistic typology of management decision making in private forest properties," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-43.
    9. Muhammad Shahid Qureshi & Saadat Saeed & Syed Waleed Mehmood Wasti, 2016. "The impact of various entrepreneurial interventions during the business plan competition on the entrepreneur identity aspirations of participants," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 6(1), pages 1-18, December.
    10. Julie Bayle-Cordier & Loïc Berger & Rayan Elatmani & Massimo Tavoni, 2023. "Breath, Love, Walk? The Impact of Mindfulness Interventions on Climate Policy Support and Environmental Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, July.
    11. Szu‐Szu Ho & Rosie Stenhouse & Aisha Holloway, 2020. "Understanding HIV‐positive drug users’ experiences of taking highly active antiretroviral treatment: Identity–Values–Conscious engagement model," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9-10), pages 1561-1575, May.
    12. Alexandre Cabagnols & Ali Maâlej & Pierre Mauchand & Olfa Kammoun, 2022. "The determinants of entrepreneurial intention of scientist PhD students: analytical vs emotional formation of the intention," Insights into Regional Development, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 4(4), pages 63-82, December.
    13. Diwanji, Vaibhav S. & Cortese, Juliann, 2020. "Contrasting user generated videos versus brand generated videos in ecommerce," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    14. Carlos Bazan, 2022. "Effect of the University’s Environment and Support System on Subjective Social Norms as Precursor of the Entrepreneurial Intention of Students," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, October.
    15. Nouman Khurram & Umair Saeed, 2015. "Factors Influencing the Intention of People to Use Islamic Banking: An Evidence from Lahore, Pakistan," International Journal of Economics and Empirical Research (IJEER), The Economics and Social Development Organization (TESDO), vol. 3(8), pages 411-418, August.
    16. Agneta Larsson & Mats Westerberg & Lena Karlqvist & Gunvor Gard, 2018. "Teamwork and Safety Climate in Homecare: A Mixed Method Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-12, November.
    17. Leonidas A. Zampetakis & Manolis Lerakis & Konstantinos Kafetsios & Vassilis S. Moustakis, 2016. "The moderating role of anticipated affective ambivalence in the formation of entrepreneurial intentions," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 815-838, September.
    18. Shuleski Darko & Radu Ioan & Anton Cristian Ioan & Crina Veronica Cristea, 2017. "Digital Transformation Approach for Improving Public Services Using Cloud Computing Technology. Case Study Bucharest, Romania," MIC 2017: Managing the Global Economy; Proceedings of the Joint International Conference, Monastier di Treviso, Italy, 24–27 May 2017,, University of Primorska Press.
    19. Nosheena Yasir & Nasir Mahmood & Hafiz Shakir Mehmood & Osama Rashid & An Liren, 2021. "The Integrated Role of Personal Values and Theory of Planned Behavior to Form a Sustainable Entrepreneurial Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    20. Zhengxia He & Shichun Xu & Wenxing Shen & Meiling Wang & Cunfang Li, 2019. "Exploring external and internal pressures on the environmental behavior of paper enterprises in China: A qualitative study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 951-969, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12333-:d:686583. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.