Mammography screening: Eliciting the voices of informed citizens

被引:0
|
作者
Jensen, Manja D. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Hansen, Kasper M. [4 ]
Siersma, Volkert [1 ,2 ]
Brodersen, John [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Publ Hlth, Res Unit Gen Practice, Copenhagen, Denmark
[2] Univ Copenhagen, Sect Gen Practice, Copenhagen, Denmark
[3] Reg Zealand, Primary Hlth Care Res Unit, Roskilde, Denmark
[4] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Polit Sci, Copenhagen, Denmark
来源
PLOS ONE | 2025年 / 20卷 / 01期
关键词
BREAST-CANCER; BENEFITS; HARMS; INFORMATION; RECOMMENDATIONS; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0317263
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background Many medical organisations recommend continuing with existing mammography screening programmes but some recommend stopping or de-intensifying them. In Denmark women aged 50-69 are offered biennial mammograms free-of-charge. Objectives The aim of this study was to determine whether or not an informed public would recommend continuation of the Danish mammography screening programme, and to determine whether this recommendation was in line with what participants considered to be acceptable levels of mortality reduction and overdiagnosis. Methods A Deliberative Poll on mammography screening was held online in Denmark and 89 citizens participated. They were representative of the general population on sociodemographic parameters, attitudes towards and knowledge of mammography screening. Participants studied a video about the programme and took part in an online citizens' assembly where they deliberated with peers and experts in the field. All participants answered a survey at four time points: at recruitment; after video information; after deliberation, and a month after the assembly. Results Questionnaire data revealed that many participants were influenced by the deliberative polling process as 36%, changed their recommendation afterwards. At recruitment, 72% of participants strongly supported the continuation of mammography screening. This proportion was lower after the presentation of video information (55%), after deliberation (65%), and a month after the assembly (58%). Interestingly, these changes in recommendation were not correlated to changes in knowledge. The proportion of participants who recommended continuation following what they stated were acceptable rates of mortality reduction and overdiagnosis rose from 21% at recruitment to 40% after information and deliberation. Most participants (60%), therefore, made a recommendation that was not in line with levels of mortality reduction and overdiagnosis that they felt were acceptable. Conclusion After video information and deliberation participants were less supportive of the mammography screening programme compared to their immediate recommendation at the beginning of the process.
引用
收藏
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Subject positions in screening mammography and implications for informed choice
    Seaman, Kristen
    Dzidic, Peta L.
    Castell, Emily
    Saunders, Christobel
    Breen, Lauren J.
    PSYCHOLOGY & HEALTH, 2021, 36 (04) : 478 - 495
  • [2] Using an informed consent in mammography screening: a randomized trial
    Baena-Canada, Jose M.
    Rosado-Varela, Petra
    Exposito-Alvarez, Inmaculada
    Gonzalez-Guerrero, Macarena
    Nieto-Vera, Juan
    Benitez-Rodriguez, Encarnacion
    CANCER MEDICINE, 2015, 4 (12): : 1923 - 1932
  • [3] Mammography screening: Are women really giving informed consent?
    Baines, CJ
    JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2003, 95 (20) : 1508 - 1511
  • [4] Knowledge and Perception of Breast Density, Screening Mammography, and Supplemental Screening: in Search of “Informed”
    Karen E. Schifferdecker
    Anna N. A. Tosteson
    Celia Kaplan
    Karla Kerlikowske
    Diana S.M. Buist
    Louise M. Henderson
    Dianne Johnson
    Jill Jaworski
    Gloria Jackson-Nefertiti
    Kelly Ehrlich
    Mary W. Marsh
    Lisa Vu
    Tracy Onega
    Karen J. Wernli
    Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2020, 35 : 1654 - 1660
  • [5] Knowledge and Perception of Breast Density, Screening Mammography, and Supplemental Screening: in Search of "Informed"
    Schifferdecker, Karen E.
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    Kaplan, Celia
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Buist, Diana S. M.
    Henderson, Louise M.
    Johnson, Dianne
    Jaworski, Jill
    Jackson-Nefertiti, Gloria
    Ehrlich, Kelly
    Marsh, Mary W.
    Vu, Lisa
    Onega, Tracy
    Wernli, Karen J.
    JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2020, 35 (06) : 1654 - 1660
  • [6] Model of outcomes of screening mammography: information to support informed choices
    Barratt, A
    Howard, K
    Irwig, L
    Salkeld, G
    Houssami, N
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 330 (7497): : 936 - 938
  • [7] Mammography screening: Are women really giving informed consent? (counterpoint)
    Berg, A
    JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2003, 95 (20) : 1511 - 1512
  • [8] Quality of Informed Consent in Mammography Screening-The Polish Experience
    Zagaja, Anna
    Bogusz, Renata
    Sak, Jaroslaw
    Wiechetek, Michal
    Pawlikowski, Jakub
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 19 (11)
  • [9] Informed citizens
    Miller, Ann
    LIBRARY JOURNAL, 2006, 131 (15) : 11 - 11
  • [10] Informed Citizens
    Gruper, Anastasia
    EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP, 2017, 74 (05) : 90 - 91