Skip Navigation

JNCI Monographs 1999 1999(25):101-119;
© 1999 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vernon, S. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vernon, S. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, No. 25, 101-119, 1999
© 1999 Oxford University Press

Risk Perception and Risk Communication for Cancer Screening Behaviors: a Review

Sally W. Vernon

Correspondence to: Sally W. Vernon, Ph.D., School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, P.O. Box 20186, Houston, TX 77225 (e-mail: svernon{at}utsph.sph.uth.tmc.edu).

This review summarizes and synthesizes research findings on risk perception and risk communication related to cancer screening behaviors. The focus is on cancers for which there is evidence that screening reduces mortality, i.e., cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers. The following questions are addressed: 1) Is perceived risk associated with relevant cancer screening behaviors? 2) What factors are associated with perceived risk? 3) Is the relationship between perceived risk and cancer screening behaviors modified by other factors? 4) Have interventions to change perceived risk been effective in modifying risk perceptions? 5) Are these changes related to subsequent cancer screening behaviors? Methodologic issues are discussed, and future research needs are identified. There was consistent evidence that perceived risk was associated with mammography screening, but there were insufficient data on these associations for cervical or colorectal cancer screening behaviors. There was some evidence that perceived risk mediated the association between other variables and screening behaviors; however, because of the small number of studies, the findings are best viewed as hypothesis generating. Studies of interventions to modify risk perceptions provided some support for the view that they are modifiable, but there was conflicting evidence that these changes were related to subsequent cancer screening. Methodologic studies of how best to measure perceived risk are needed. Because most data on the correlates of perceived risk were cross-sectional, it is difficult to determine whether perceived risk is a cause or an effect in relation to cancer screening. Longitudinal studies that measure perceived risk in defined populations with different cancer screening histories and that include follow-up for screening and repeated measurements of risk perception are needed to clarify this relationship.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
I. Senay and K. A. Kaphingst
Anchoring-and-Adjustment Bias in Communication of Disease Risk
Med Decis Making, March 1, 2009; 29(2): 193 - 201.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
L. A.V. Marlow, J. Waller, and J. Wardle
The Impact of Human Papillomavirus Information on Perceived Risk of Cervical Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., February 1, 2009; 18(2): 373 - 376.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
K. C. Oeffinger, J. S. Ford, C. S. Moskowitz, L. R. Diller, M. M. Hudson, J. F. Chou, S. M. Smith, A. C. Mertens, T. O. Henderson, D. L. Friedman, et al.
Breast Cancer Surveillance Practices Among Women Previously Treated With Chest Radiation for a Childhood Cancer
JAMA, January 28, 2009; 301(4): 404 - 414.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
N. T. Brewer, T. Salz, and S. E. Lillie
Systematic Review: The Long-Term Effects of False-Positive Mammograms
Ann Intern Med, April 3, 2007; 146(7): 502 - 510.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
A. McQueen, S. W. Vernon, R. E. Myers, B. G. Watts, E. S. Lee, and B. C. Tilley
Correlates and Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Screening among Male Automotive Workers
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., March 1, 2007; 16(3): 500 - 509.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
K. Brewster, E. P. Wileyto, L. Kessler, A. Collier, B. Weathers, J. E. Stopfer, S. Domchek, and C. H. Halbert
Sociocultural Predictors of Breast Cancer Risk Perceptions in African American Breast Cancer Survivors
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., February 1, 2007; 16(2): 244 - 248.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF LIFESTYLE MEDICINEHome page
R. E. Gramling and J. I. Vidrine
Risk Communication During Screening for Genomic Breast Cancer Susceptibility
American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, January 1, 2007; 1(1): 54 - 58.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.