IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i19p10472-d650280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Perceptions of the Role of Lifestyle Factors in Cancer Development: Results from the Spanish Onco-Barometer 2020

Author

Listed:
  • Dafina Petrova

    (CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain
    Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP), 18011 Granada, Spain
    Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, 18012 Granada, Spain)

  • Josep Maria Borrás

    (Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Barcelona, 08908 Barcelona, Spain
    Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute, 08908 Hospitalet, Spain
    NHS Cancer Strategy, Ministry of Health, 28046 Madrid, Spain)

  • Marina Pollán

    (CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain
    National Center for Epidemiology, Health Institute Carlos III, 28029 Madrid, Spain)

  • Eloísa Bayo Lozano

    (University Hospital Virgen Macarena, 41009 Seville, Spain)

  • David Vicente

    (University Hospital Virgen Macarena, 41009 Seville, Spain)

  • José Juan Jiménez Moleón

    (CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain
    Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, 18012 Granada, Spain
    Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, 18010 Granada, Spain)

  • Maria José Sánchez

    (CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain
    Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP), 18011 Granada, Spain
    Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, 18012 Granada, Spain
    Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, 18010 Granada, Spain)

Abstract

The European Code against Cancer recommends not to smoke, to avoid alcohol consumption, to eat a healthy diet, and maintain a healthy weight to prevent cancer. To what extent is the public aware of the influence of these lifestyle factors on cancer development? The goal of the current study was to describe the perceived influence of four lifestyle factors (tobacco, alcohol, diet, and weight) on cancer development in the general population and identify factors related to low perceptions of influence. We analyzed data from the 2020 Onco-barometer (n = 4769), a representative population-based survey conducted in Spain. With the exception of smoking, lifestyle factors were among those with the least perceived influence, more so among the demographic groups at higher risk from cancer including men and older individuals (65+ years). Individuals from lower socio-economic groups were more likely to report not knowing what influence lifestyle factors have on cancer. Lower perceived influence was also consistently related to perceiving very low risk from cancer. Overall, although there is variation in perceptions regarding the different lifestyle factors, low perceived influence clusters among those at higher risk for cancer. These results signal the need for public health campaigns and messages informing the public about the preventive potential of lifestyle factors beyond avoiding tobacco consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Dafina Petrova & Josep Maria Borrás & Marina Pollán & Eloísa Bayo Lozano & David Vicente & José Juan Jiménez Moleón & Maria José Sánchez, 2021. "Public Perceptions of the Role of Lifestyle Factors in Cancer Development: Results from the Spanish Onco-Barometer 2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:19:p:10472-:d:650280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/19/10472/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/19/10472/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dafina Petrova & Rocio Garcia-Retamero & Edward T. Cokely, 2015. "Understanding the Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(7), pages 847-858, 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. repec:plo:pone00:0218821 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Maren Reder & Petra Kolip, 2017. "Does a decision aid improve informed choice in mammography screening? Results from a randomised controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:19:p:10472-:d:650280. 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.