IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v31y2011i1p108-120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Men Make Informed Decisions about Prostate Cancer Screening? Baseline Results from the “Take the Wheel†Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer D. Allen
  • Megan K. D. Othus
  • Alton Hart Jr
  • Anshu P. Mohllajee
  • Yi Li
  • Deborah Bowen

Abstract

Background. The efficacy of prostate cancer (CaP) screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test is debated. Most medical organizations recommend that men make individual, informed decisions about whether to undergo screening. Informed decision making (IDM) requires adequate knowledge about CaP as well as the risks and benefits of screening; confidence in the ability to participate in decision making at a personally desired level (decision self-efficacy); and decision making that reflects one’s values and preferences (decisional consistency). Methods . Baseline data from a randomized trial in 12 worksites were analyzed. Men aged 45+ ( n = 812) completed surveys documenting screening history, screening preferences and decisions, CaP knowledge, decision self-efficacy, and decisional consistency. Psychosocial and demographic correlates of IDM were also assessed. Results. Approximately half of the sample had a prior PSA test, although only 35% reported having made an explicit screening decision. Across the sample, CaP knowledge was low (mean = 56%), although decision self-efficacy was high (mean = 78%), and the majority of men (81%) made decisions consistent with their stated values. Compared with those who were undecided, men who made an explicit screening decision had significantly higher levels of knowledge, greater decisional self-efficacy, and were more consistent in terms of making a decision in alignment with their values. They tended to be white, have high levels of income and education, and had discussed screening with their health care provider. Conclusions. Many men undergo CaP screening without being fully informed about the decision. These findings support the need for interventions aimed at improving IDM about screening, particularly among men of color, those with lower levels of income and education, and those who have not discussed screening with their provider.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer D. Allen & Megan K. D. Othus & Alton Hart Jr & Anshu P. Mohllajee & Yi Li & Deborah Bowen, 2011. "Do Men Make Informed Decisions about Prostate Cancer Screening? Baseline Results from the “Take the Wheel†Trial," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(1), pages 108-120, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:31:y:2011:i:1:p:108-120
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X10369002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X10369002
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X10369002?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicholas A. Alford & Manasicha Wongpaiboon & John S. Luque & Cynthia M. Harris & Rima H. Tawk, 2023. "Associations of Content and Context of Communication with Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(9), pages 1-12, May.

    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:31:y:2011:i:1:p:108-120. 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.