评估媒体报道 NordICC 试验对公众关于结肠镜检查大肠癌筛查观点的影响。

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Eden Sharabi, Kushagra Mathur, So Yung Choi, Barbara Hollander, Brennan Spiegel, Christopher V Almario
{"title":"评估媒体报道 NordICC 试验对公众关于结肠镜检查大肠癌筛查观点的影响。","authors":"Eden Sharabi, Kushagra Mathur, So Yung Choi, Barbara Hollander, Brennan Spiegel, Christopher V Almario","doi":"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Screening tests like colonoscopy can prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), yet their effectiveness is often questioned. The Nordic-European Initiative on Colorectal Cancer (NordICC) trial demonstrated that colonoscopy significantly reduces CRC incidence and mortality in per-protocol analysis. However, media coverage of the trial often focused on intention-to-screen findings that showed no change in mortality, possibly contributing to public confusion about colonoscopy benefits. This study aimed to assess whether such media articles undermined public perception and intent to undergo colonoscopic screening.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited a US nationally representative sample of unscreened adults aged 45 to 75 years at average CRC risk. Respondents were randomized 1:1 to read either a low-quality or high-quality article on NordICC, as rated by a panel of gastroenterologists. Before and after reading their article, participants reported whether they plan to be screened for CRC with a colonoscopy. Our primary outcome was a negative change in intent to undergo colonoscopic screening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 2013 participants who completed the survey, 1531 (76.1%) stated they planned to undergo colonoscopy or were undecided before reading the article. After reading the media report, 90 (12.0%) people in the low-quality article arm no longer planned to undergo colonoscopy versus 73 (9.3%) in the high-quality article arm; the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.08).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>A widely promulgated article about NordICC rated as low-quality did not differentially impact attitudes towards colonoscopic CRC screening compared with another mainstream article rated as high-quality. Our study provides reassurance that most people will not summarily change health behaviors after reading a single article, regardless of perceived accuracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":15457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the Impact of Media Coverage of the NordICC Trial on Public Perspectives on Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening.\",\"authors\":\"Eden Sharabi, Kushagra Mathur, So Yung Choi, Barbara Hollander, Brennan Spiegel, Christopher V Almario\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002144\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Screening tests like colonoscopy can prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), yet their effectiveness is often questioned. The Nordic-European Initiative on Colorectal Cancer (NordICC) trial demonstrated that colonoscopy significantly reduces CRC incidence and mortality in per-protocol analysis. However, media coverage of the trial often focused on intention-to-screen findings that showed no change in mortality, possibly contributing to public confusion about colonoscopy benefits. This study aimed to assess whether such media articles undermined public perception and intent to undergo colonoscopic screening.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited a US nationally representative sample of unscreened adults aged 45 to 75 years at average CRC risk. Respondents were randomized 1:1 to read either a low-quality or high-quality article on NordICC, as rated by a panel of gastroenterologists. Before and after reading their article, participants reported whether they plan to be screened for CRC with a colonoscopy. Our primary outcome was a negative change in intent to undergo colonoscopic screening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 2013 participants who completed the survey, 1531 (76.1%) stated they planned to undergo colonoscopy or were undecided before reading the article. After reading the media report, 90 (12.0%) people in the low-quality article arm no longer planned to undergo colonoscopy versus 73 (9.3%) in the high-quality article arm; the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.08).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>A widely promulgated article about NordICC rated as low-quality did not differentially impact attitudes towards colonoscopic CRC screening compared with another mainstream article rated as high-quality. Our study provides reassurance that most people will not summarily change health behaviors after reading a single article, regardless of perceived accuracy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002144\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002144","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the Impact of Media Coverage of the NordICC Trial on Public Perspectives on Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Introduction: Screening tests like colonoscopy can prevent colorectal cancer (CRC), yet their effectiveness is often questioned. The Nordic-European Initiative on Colorectal Cancer (NordICC) trial demonstrated that colonoscopy significantly reduces CRC incidence and mortality in per-protocol analysis. However, media coverage of the trial often focused on intention-to-screen findings that showed no change in mortality, possibly contributing to public confusion about colonoscopy benefits. This study aimed to assess whether such media articles undermined public perception and intent to undergo colonoscopic screening.

Methods: We recruited a US nationally representative sample of unscreened adults aged 45 to 75 years at average CRC risk. Respondents were randomized 1:1 to read either a low-quality or high-quality article on NordICC, as rated by a panel of gastroenterologists. Before and after reading their article, participants reported whether they plan to be screened for CRC with a colonoscopy. Our primary outcome was a negative change in intent to undergo colonoscopic screening.

Results: Among the 2013 participants who completed the survey, 1531 (76.1%) stated they planned to undergo colonoscopy or were undecided before reading the article. After reading the media report, 90 (12.0%) people in the low-quality article arm no longer planned to undergo colonoscopy versus 73 (9.3%) in the high-quality article arm; the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.08).

Discussion: A widely promulgated article about NordICC rated as low-quality did not differentially impact attitudes towards colonoscopic CRC screening compared with another mainstream article rated as high-quality. Our study provides reassurance that most people will not summarily change health behaviors after reading a single article, regardless of perceived accuracy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of clinical gastroenterology
Journal of clinical gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.40%
发文量
339
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology gathers the world''s latest, most relevant clinical studies and reviews, case reports, and technical expertise in a single source. Regular features include cutting-edge, peer-reviewed articles and clinical reviews that put the latest research and development into the context of your practice. Also included are biographies, focused organ reviews, practice management, and therapeutic recommendations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信