Skip to main content

COVID-19 is an emerging, rapidly evolving situation.

What people with cancer should know: https://www.cancer.gov/coronavirus

Guidance for cancer researchers: https://www.cancer.gov/coronavirus-researchers

Get the latest public health information from CDC: https://www.coronavirus.gov

Get the latest research information from NIH: https://www.covid19.nih.gov

Grant Details

Grant Number: 5R21CA133376-02 Interpret this number
Primary Investigator: Hay, Jennifer
Organization: Sloan-Kettering Inst Can Research
Project Title: Cancer Risks Beliefs & Screening
Fiscal Year: 2010


Abstract

DESCRIPTION (provided by investigator): The perception of being at risk for cancer is an important prerequisite for cancer screening adherence, as indicated by empirical evidence and its central role in health behavior theories. Yet existent cancer risk perception measures entail one-item assessments of perceived illness probability, a strategy with known limits to reliability and validity. There are compelling arguments that affective (emotional, feeling-based) and intuitive cognitive (automatic, non-rational) processing is important as individuals' think about their personal cancer risk. We developed a questionnaire to measure affective and intuitive cognitive processing of personal cancer risk (Cancer Risk Beliefs Scale) encompassing five factors (Cognitive Causation, Negative Affect in Risk, Defensive Pessimism about Risk, Unpredictability of Cancer Risk, and Cancer Preventability). This current R21 application tests the construct and predictive validity of Cognitive Causation and Negative Affect in Risk in the context of colorectal cancer screening in 800 diverse, primary care patients ages 50 and over. We propose a prospective, observational study to examine the relationship of affective and intuitive cognitive processing of risk with colorectal cancer screening adherence. The primary hypothesis is that those high in affective and intuitive cognitive processing of risk will have an attenuated relationship between cancer risk perceptions and screening. This would provide a novel way to identify those for whom interventions to increase cancer risk appreciation may be less useful in motivating screening. We will characterize these individuals' beliefs with specificity that will be useful in developing alternative interventions for them. We propose; Aim I: to examine the prevalence and construct validity of cancer risk beliefs in a large, diverse primary care population, Aim II, to examine the relationship of affective and intuitive cognitive processing about cancer risk to colorectal cancer screening adherence, and Aim III, to examine the relationship of affective and intuitive cognitive processing about cancer risk to prospective uptake of colorectal cancer screening. The work proposed here draws on recent research on affect and cognitive processing of uncertainty to offer novel solutions to cancer screening non-adherence. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: This work draws from recent decision-making research to offer novel solutions to cancer screening nonadherence. The study tests whether affective and intuitive cognitive processing of personal cancer risk, assessed through the newly-developed Cancer Risk Beliefs Scale, is related to colorectal cancer screening adherence in a diverse primary care population. These findings will provide a novel way to identify and intervene with those who are unresponsive to established perceived risk-enhancing screening interventions.



Publications

Measurement invariance of intuitive cancer risk perceptions across diverse populations: The Cognitive Causation and Negative Affect in Risk scales.
Authors: Baser R.E. , Li Y. , Brennessel D. , Kemeny M.M. , Hay J.L. .
Source: Journal of health psychology, 2019 08; 24(9), p. 1221-1232.
EPub date: 2017-02-01.
PMID: 28810422
Related Citations

Deliberative and intuitive risk perceptions as predictors of colorectal cancer screening over time.
Authors: Hay J.L. , Ramos M. , Li Y. , Holland S. , Brennessel D. , Kemeny M.M. .
Source: Journal of behavioral medicine, 2016 Feb; 39(1), p. 65-74.
EPub date: 2015-08-18.
PMID: 26280754
Related Citations

Does colorectal cancer risk perception predict screening behavior? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Authors: Atkinson T.M. , Salz T. , Touza K.K. , Li Y. , Hay J.L. .
Source: Journal of behavioral medicine, 2015 Dec; 38(6), p. 837-50.
EPub date: 2015-08-18.
PMID: 26280755
Related Citations

"I don't know" my cancer risk: exploring deficits in cancer knowledge and information-seeking skills to explain an often-overlooked participant response.
Authors: Hay J.L. , Orom H. , Kiviniemi M.T. , Waters E.A. .
Source: Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2015 05; 35(4), p. 436-45.
EPub date: 2015-03-25.
PMID: 25810268
Related Citations

Examining intuitive risk perceptions for cancer in diverse populations.
Authors: Hay J.L. , Baser R. , Weinstein N.D. , Li Y. , Primavera L. , Kemeny M.M. .
Source: Health, risk & society, 2014-01-01; 16(3), p. 227-242.
PMID: 24999304
Related Citations

"Don't know" responses to risk perception measures: implications for underserved populations.
Authors: Waters E.A. , Hay J.L. , Orom H. , Kiviniemi M.T. , Drake B.F. .
Source: Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2013 02; 33(2), p. 271-81.
PMID: 23468476
Related Citations

Awareness of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force recommended changes in mammography screening guidelines, accuracy of awareness, sources of knowledge about recommendations, and attitudes about updated screening guidelines in women ages 40-49 and 50+.
Authors: Kiviniemi M.T. , Hay J.L. .
Source: BMC public health, 2012-10-24; 12, p. 899.
EPub date: 2012-10-24.
PMID: 23092125
Related Citations

Skin cancer concerns and genetic risk information-seeking in primary care.
Authors: Hay J. , Kaphingst K.A. , Baser R. , Li Y. , Hensley-Alford S. , McBride C.M. .
Source: Public health genomics, 2012; 15(2), p. 57-72.
EPub date: 2011-09-13.
PMID: 21921576
Related Citations




Back to Top