{"title":"Demographic Disparities and Factors Influencing Cancer Treatment Decision-Making.","authors":"Safa Elkefi, Avishek Choudhury","doi":"10.1007/s13187-025-02570-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aims to explore disparities in cancer treatment decision-making and the factors associated with the decision to pursue treatment. We used Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data collected between 2017 and 2022. We employed the PRECEDE-PROCEED model to guide our analysis of factors associated with treatment decisions. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analysis were conducted to assess the association between treatment decision-making and the predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors (following the PRECEDE-PROCEED model). All analyses were weighted and adjusted for the demographic characteristics of the participants. Our sample included N = 19,388 cancer patients, 20.98% of whom refused treatment. American Indians, younger adults, and breast cancer patients were more likely to decide to go for treatment. Patients who had private insurance (OR = 1.25, P = .037) and those who did not have problems affording care (OR = 1.22, P = .02) were more likely to decide to get treatment. The more patients had regular doctors, the more they decided to continue to pursue treatment for cancer (Only one doctor: OR = 1.20, P = .042; More than one: OR = 1.28, P = .007). Finally, the more days patients experienced a bad health situation, the more they decided to have cancer treatment (for 14 + days with bad health: OR = 1.20, P < .001). The results suggest the need for enhanced patient education to improve cancer treatment adherence and informed decision-making. It highlights the importance of culturally tailored educational programs, age-related concerns, addressing financial barriers, and emphasizing the importance of regular healthcare visits for cancer patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02570-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study aims to explore disparities in cancer treatment decision-making and the factors associated with the decision to pursue treatment. We used Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data collected between 2017 and 2022. We employed the PRECEDE-PROCEED model to guide our analysis of factors associated with treatment decisions. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analysis were conducted to assess the association between treatment decision-making and the predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors (following the PRECEDE-PROCEED model). All analyses were weighted and adjusted for the demographic characteristics of the participants. Our sample included N = 19,388 cancer patients, 20.98% of whom refused treatment. American Indians, younger adults, and breast cancer patients were more likely to decide to go for treatment. Patients who had private insurance (OR = 1.25, P = .037) and those who did not have problems affording care (OR = 1.22, P = .02) were more likely to decide to get treatment. The more patients had regular doctors, the more they decided to continue to pursue treatment for cancer (Only one doctor: OR = 1.20, P = .042; More than one: OR = 1.28, P = .007). Finally, the more days patients experienced a bad health situation, the more they decided to have cancer treatment (for 14 + days with bad health: OR = 1.20, P < .001). The results suggest the need for enhanced patient education to improve cancer treatment adherence and informed decision-making. It highlights the importance of culturally tailored educational programs, age-related concerns, addressing financial barriers, and emphasizing the importance of regular healthcare visits for cancer patients.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues.
Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care.
We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts.
Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited.
Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants.
Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.