IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v43y2023i4p403-416.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Danish Women Want to Participate in a Hypothetical Breast Cancer Screening with Harms and No Reduction in Mortality: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Eeva-Liisa Røssell

    (Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark)

  • Anne Bo

    (Social & Health Services and Labour Market, DEFACTUM, Aarhus, Denmark)

  • Therese Koops Grønborg

    (Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark)

  • Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen

    (Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway)

  • Signe Borgquist

    (Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark)

  • Laura D. Scherer

    (School of Medicine, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, United States of America)

  • Henrik Støvring

    (Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark)

Abstract

Introduction Informed decision making is recommended in breast cancer screening. Decision aids with balanced information on harms and benefits are recommended to support informed decision making. However, informed screening decision making may be challenged by overly positive attitudes toward cancer screening. We hypothesized that a substantial proportion of Danish women would want to participate in screening regardless of the presented information. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of Danish women wanting to participate in a hypothetical breast cancer screening offering no reduction in breast cancer mortality but potential harms related to unnecessary treatment. Methods In a cross-sectional study, we invited a random sample of 751 women in the nonscreening population aged 44 to 49 y in the Central Denmark Region to an online questionnaire using the official digital mailbox system. The questionnaire included a description of a hypothetical screening and questions about thoughts on breast cancer, health literacy, and questions on the assessment of the hypothetical screening including intended participation, understanding, and belief in information. Data were linked to register data on sociodemographic factors. Results In total, 43.0% (323/751) responded to the questionnaire. Of these, 247 (82.3% [95% confidence interval: 77.5–86.5]) wanted to participate in the hypothetical breast cancer screening (participation group). More than two-thirds in both the participation group and nonparticipation group seemed to understand the presented information. Half of the women who understood the information disbelieved it. Conclusions Exceeding our expectations, a majority of women wanted to participate in a hypothetical screening with potential harms but no reduction in breast cancer mortality. A large proportion understood but disbelieved the screening information. This could indicate that Danish women make their screening decisions based on beliefs rather than presented screening information. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04509063) Highlights The majority of Danish women wanted to participate in a hypothetical breast cancer screening with potential harms related to unnecessary treatment but no reduction in mortality. A large proportion of women understood but disbelieved the hypothetical screening information. Informed decision making may be challenging when women disbelieve the information they receive. Enthusiasm for cancer screening and potential disbelief in information are important factors when developing and improving screening information and invitation.

Suggested Citation

  • Eeva-Liisa Røssell & Anne Bo & Therese Koops Grønborg & Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen & Signe Borgquist & Laura D. Scherer & Henrik Støvring, 2023. "Danish Women Want to Participate in a Hypothetical Breast Cancer Screening with Harms and No Reduction in Mortality: A Cross-Sectional Survey," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(4), pages 403-416, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:43:y:2023:i:4:p:403-416
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X231152830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X231152830
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X231152830?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:sae:medema:v:43:y:2023:i:4:p:403-416. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.