Understanding the Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening

Objective. Decisions about cancer screenings often involve the consideration of complex and counterintuitive evidence. We investigated psychological factors that promote the comprehension of benefits and harms associated with common cancer screenings and their influence on shared decision making. Methods. In experiment 1, 256 men received information about PSA-based prostate cancer screening. In experiment 2, 355 women received information about mammography-based breast cancer screening. In both studies, information about potential screening outcomes was provided in 1 of 3 formats: text, a fact box, or a visual aid (e.g., mortality with and without screening and rate of overdiagnosis). We modeled the interplay of comprehension, perceived risks and benefits, intention to participate in screening, and desire for shared decision making. Results. Generally, visual aids were the most effective format, increasing comprehension by up to 18%. Improved comprehension was associated with 1) superior decision making (e.g., fewer intentions to participate in screening when it offered no benefit) and 2) more desire to share in decision making. However, comprehension of the evidence had a limited effect on experienced emotions, risk perceptions, and decision making among those participants who felt that the consequences of cancer were extremely severe. Conclusions. Even when information is counterintuitive and requires the integration of complex harms and benefits, user-friendly risk communications can facilitate comprehension, improve high-stakes decisions, and promote shared decision making. However, previous beliefs about the effectiveness of screening or strong fears about specific cancers may interfere with comprehension and informed decision making.

[1]  Richard W. Olshavsky,et al.  Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: A replication and extension , 1979 .

[2]  M. Galesic,et al.  Who profits from visual aids: overcoming challenges in people's understanding of risks [corrected]. , 2010, Social science & medicine.

[3]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Money, Kisses, and Electric Shocks: On the Affective Psychology of Risk , 2001, Psychological science.

[4]  Nancy Kraetschmer,et al.  Do people want to be autonomous patients? Preferred roles in treatment decision‐making in several patient populations , 2007, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[5]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  How causal knowledge simplifies decision-making , 2006, Minds and Machines.

[6]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Factors predicting surgeons' preferred and actual roles in interactions with their patients. , 2014, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[7]  P. Ubel,et al.  Communicating side effect risks in a tamoxifen prophylaxis decision aid: the debiasing influence of pictographs. , 2008, Patient education and counseling.

[8]  R. Deber,et al.  What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? , 1996, Archives of internal medicine.

[9]  B. Rimer,et al.  General Performance on a Numeracy Scale among Highly Educated Samples , 2001, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[10]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Individual Differences in Graph Literacy: Overcoming Denominator Neglect in Risk Comprehension , 2012 .

[11]  Rhodri Hayward,et al.  Screening , 2008, The Lancet.

[12]  John W. Payne,et al.  Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis☆ , 1976 .

[13]  W. Gaissmaier,et al.  Numbers can be worth a thousand pictures: individual differences in understanding graphical and numerical representations of health-related information. , 2012, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[14]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Misinformation and Its Correction , 2012, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[15]  P. Ubel,et al.  Reducing the Influence of Anecdotal Reasoning on People’s Health Care Decisions: Is a Picture Worth a Thousand Statistics? , 2005, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[16]  Jesse J. Chandler,et al.  Inside the Turk , 2014 .

[17]  Christophe Giraud-Carrier,et al.  Using Twitter for breast cancer prevention: an analysis of breast cancer awareness month , 2013, BMC Cancer.

[18]  C. Klabunde,et al.  National Evidence on the Use of Shared Decision Making in Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening , 2013, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[19]  Laura D. Scherer,et al.  Blocks, Ovals, or People? Icon Type Affects Risk Perceptions and Recall of Pictographs , 2014, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[20]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Public Knowledge of Benefits of Breast and Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[21]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  "There is nothing to worry about": gynecologists' counseling on mammography. , 2011, Patient education and counseling.

[22]  Angela Fagerlin,et al.  Improving understanding of adjuvant therapy options by using simpler risk graphics , 2008, Cancer.

[23]  V. Moyer,et al.  Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[24]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  The value of benefit data in direct-to-consumer drug ads. , 2004, Health affairs.

[25]  Richard E. Sharpe,et al.  The Effect of the Controversial US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations on the Use of Screening Mammography. , 2016, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[26]  Peter Salovey,et al.  The Systematic Influence of Gain-and Loss-Framed Messages on Interest in and Use of Different Types of Health Behavior , 1999 .

[27]  A. Shiell,et al.  Participation in treatment decision‐making by women with early stage breast cancer , 1999, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[28]  N D Weinstein,et al.  Perceived probability, perceived severity, and health-protective behavior. , 2000, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[29]  R. Thomson,et al.  Patients' preference for involvement in medical decision making: a narrative review. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[30]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  The Influence of Skills, Message Frame, and Visual Aids on Prevention of Sexually Transmitted Diseases , 2014 .

[31]  J. Wardle,et al.  Women's responses to information about overdiagnosis in the UK breast cancer screening programme: a qualitative study , 2013, BMJ Open.

[32]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Measuring Risk Literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test , 2012, Judgment and Decision Making.

[33]  Paul K. J. Han,et al.  Presenting quantitative information about decision outcomes: a risk communication primer for patient decision aid developers , 2013, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[34]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  When One Cue is not Enough: Combining Fast and Frugal Heuristics with Compound Cue Processing , 2007, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[35]  B. Rimer,et al.  Informed decision making: What is its role in cancer screening? , 2004, Cancer.

[36]  C. K. Mertz,et al.  Less Is More in Presenting Quality Information to Consumers , 2007, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[37]  T. Wilt,et al.  Screening for prostate cancer. , 2013, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[38]  Nancy Breen,et al.  Factors associated with men's use of prostate-specific antigen screening: evidence from Health Information National Trends Survey. , 2005, Preventive medicine.

[39]  Andrew M. Parker,et al.  Social network effects of nonlifesaving early-stage breast cancer detection on mammography rates. , 2014, American journal of public health.

[40]  W. Gaissmaier,et al.  Psa Screening: Some Background and Clinical Evidence Psychological Research and the Prostate- Cancer Screening Controversy , 2022 .

[41]  E. Peters.  Beyond Comprehension , 2012 .

[42]  V. Reyna,et al.  How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. , 2009, Psychological bulletin.

[43]  Carmen L. Lewis,et al.  Decision-Making Processes for Breast, Colorectal, and Prostate Cancer Screening: The DECISIONS Survey , 2010, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[44]  Brian Reid,et al.  Overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: an opportunity for improvement. , 2013, JAMA.

[45]  K. Jørgensen.  Women’s views on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: a qualitative study , 2013, BMJ.

[46]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Science Current Directions in Psychological , 2010 .

[47]  Steven Woloshin,et al.  Using a Drug Facts Box to Communicate Drug Benefits and Harms Two Randomized Trials , 2009, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[48]  P. Gøtzsche,et al.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography. , 2013, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[49]  G. Gigerenzer,et al.  Using icon arrays to communicate medical risks: overcoming low numeracy. , 2009, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[50]  A. Bandura.  Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and Functioning , 1993, Educational Psychologist.

[51]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Effective communication of risks to young adults: using message framing and visual aids to increase condom use and STD screening. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[52]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Do Physicians Understand Cancer Screening Statistics? A National Survey of Primary Care Physicians in the United States , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[53]  Stacey L Sheridan,et al.  Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention. a suggested approach from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. , 2004, American journal of preventive medicine.

[54]  Steven Woloshin,et al.  The Drug Facts Box: Providing Consumers with Simple Tabular Data on Drug Benefit and Harm , 2007, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[55]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Breast cancer screening pamphlets mislead women , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[56]  Neeraj Arora,et al.  Patient preferences for medical decision making: who really wants to participate? , 2000, Medical care.

[57]  M. Galesic,et al.  Statistical Numeracy for Health A Cross-cultural Comparison With Probabilistic National Samples , 2010 .

[58]  A. Hayes.  Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach , 2013 .

[59]  A. Maldonado,et al.  The power of causal beliefs and conflicting evidence on causal judgments and decision making , 2009 .

[60]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  The Role of Numeracy in Understanding the Benefit of Screening Mammography , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[61]  A. Barratt.  Overdiagnosis in mammography screening: a 45 year journey from shadowy idea to acknowledged reality , 2015, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[62]  I. Nyirjesy.  Enthusiasm for Cancer Screening in the United States , 2008 .

[63]  Mirta Galesic,et al.  Communicating consequences of risky behaviors: Life expectancy versus risk of disease. , 2011, Patient education and counseling.

[64]  R. Hertwig,et al.  The affect gap in risky choice : Affect-rich outcomes attenuate attention to probability information , 2014 .

[65]  P. Slovic,et al.  Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. , 2007, Health affairs.