IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v340y2024ics0277953623007542.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Provider communication contributes to colorectal cancer screening intention through improving screening outcome expectancies and perceived behavioral control

Author

Listed:
  • Zhu, Xuan
  • Squiers, Linda
  • Helmueller, Leah
  • Madson, Gabriel
  • Southwell, Brian G.
  • Alam, Shama
  • Finney Rutten, Lila J.

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening continues to be underutilized in the US despite the availability of multiple effective, guideline-recommended screening options. Provider recommendation has been consistently shown to improve screening completion. Yet, available literature provides little information as to how specific information providers communicate influence patient decision-making about CRC screening. We tested the pathways through which information communicated by providers about the “Why” and “How” of CRC screening using the mt-sDNA test contributes to intention to complete the test. Data came from a behavioral theory-informed survey that we developed to identify psychosocial factors associated with mt-sDNA screening. RTI International administered the survey between 03/2022-06/2022 to a sample of US adults ages 45–75 who received a valid order for mt-sDNA screening with a shipping date between 5/2021-9/2021. Participants completed an electronic or paper survey. We tested the proposed relationships using structural equation modeling and tested indirect effects using Monte Carlo method. A total of 2,973 participants completed the survey (response rate: 21.7%) and 81.6% (n = 2,427) reported have had a conversation with their health care provider about mt-sDNA screening before the test was ordered. We found that “Why” information from providers was positively associated with perceived effectiveness of mt-sDNA screening, while “How” information was positively associated with perceived ease of use. “Why” information contributed to screening intention through perceived effectiveness while “How” information contributed to screening intention through perceived ease of use. These findings emphasize the critical role of provider communication in shaping patient decision-making regarding CRC screening. CRC screening interventions could consider implementing provider-patient communication strategies focusing on improving patient understanding of the rationale for CRC screening and the effectiveness of available screening options as well as addressing barriers and enhancing patients’ self-efficacy in completing their preferred screening option.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhu, Xuan & Squiers, Linda & Helmueller, Leah & Madson, Gabriel & Southwell, Brian G. & Alam, Shama & Finney Rutten, Lila J., 2024. "Provider communication contributes to colorectal cancer screening intention through improving screening outcome expectancies and perceived behavioral control," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 340(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:340:y:2024:i:c:s0277953623007542
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623007542
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116397?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:socmed:v:340:y:2024:i:c:s0277953623007542. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.