Alfonsus Adrian H Harsono, Rachel Ruiz, Meghna Katta, Hannah Ficarino Sheffer, Marshall Chandler McLeod, Smita Bhatia, Daniel I Chu, Robert H Hollis
{"title":"健康素养与结直肠癌筛查之间的关系:使用三问题健康素养测量的结果。","authors":"Alfonsus Adrian H Harsono, Rachel Ruiz, Meghna Katta, Hannah Ficarino Sheffer, Marshall Chandler McLeod, Smita Bhatia, Daniel I Chu, Robert H Hollis","doi":"10.1007/s12029-025-01241-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Health literacy (HL) can impact health behaviors including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Prior findings using extensive measures of HL suggested that low HL is associated with lower CRC screening rates. We hypothesized that low HL, when measured using a clinically applicable three-question measure, would also be associated with low CRC screening rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data collected from the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) was utilized from 17 states that included a three-question HL measure. Participants ages 50-75 were included. The HL scores were categorized as adequate, marginal, or limited HL. The primary outcome was United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation-concordant CRC screening. The relationship between HL and CRC screening was examined using multivariable logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 38,044 participants who met inclusion criteria, 47.2% (n = 17,950), 49.9% (n = 18,989), and 2.9% (n = 1105) had adequate, marginal, and limited HL, respectively. Lower HL levels were associated with lower adherence to USPSTF CRC screening recommendations: 73.3% for adequate, 68.0% for marginal, and 48.9% for limited HL (p < 0.01). Respondents with limited HL were 45% less likely to undergo CRC screening (OR = 0.55; 95%CI: 0.48-0.63). A significant interaction (p < 0.01) between health literacy and sex was identified. CRC screening difference among HL levels was more pronounced for male (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.40-0.79) than female respondents (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.52-0.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Limited health literacy is associated with significantly lower rates of appropriate CRC screening, particularly for males. This three-question HL measure provides a clinically applicable tool to identify people at risk for lack of CRC screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":15895,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","volume":"56 1","pages":"111"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Association Between Health Literacy and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Findings Using a Three-Question Health Literacy Measure.\",\"authors\":\"Alfonsus Adrian H Harsono, Rachel Ruiz, Meghna Katta, Hannah Ficarino Sheffer, Marshall Chandler McLeod, Smita Bhatia, Daniel I Chu, Robert H Hollis\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12029-025-01241-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Health literacy (HL) can impact health behaviors including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Prior findings using extensive measures of HL suggested that low HL is associated with lower CRC screening rates. We hypothesized that low HL, when measured using a clinically applicable three-question measure, would also be associated with low CRC screening rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data collected from the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) was utilized from 17 states that included a three-question HL measure. Participants ages 50-75 were included. The HL scores were categorized as adequate, marginal, or limited HL. The primary outcome was United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation-concordant CRC screening. The relationship between HL and CRC screening was examined using multivariable logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 38,044 participants who met inclusion criteria, 47.2% (n = 17,950), 49.9% (n = 18,989), and 2.9% (n = 1105) had adequate, marginal, and limited HL, respectively. Lower HL levels were associated with lower adherence to USPSTF CRC screening recommendations: 73.3% for adequate, 68.0% for marginal, and 48.9% for limited HL (p < 0.01). Respondents with limited HL were 45% less likely to undergo CRC screening (OR = 0.55; 95%CI: 0.48-0.63). A significant interaction (p < 0.01) between health literacy and sex was identified. CRC screening difference among HL levels was more pronounced for male (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.40-0.79) than female respondents (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.52-0.76).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Limited health literacy is associated with significantly lower rates of appropriate CRC screening, particularly for males. This three-question HL measure provides a clinically applicable tool to identify people at risk for lack of CRC screening.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15895,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-025-01241-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-025-01241-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Association Between Health Literacy and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Findings Using a Three-Question Health Literacy Measure.
Purpose: Health literacy (HL) can impact health behaviors including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Prior findings using extensive measures of HL suggested that low HL is associated with lower CRC screening rates. We hypothesized that low HL, when measured using a clinically applicable three-question measure, would also be associated with low CRC screening rates.
Methods: Data collected from the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) was utilized from 17 states that included a three-question HL measure. Participants ages 50-75 were included. The HL scores were categorized as adequate, marginal, or limited HL. The primary outcome was United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation-concordant CRC screening. The relationship between HL and CRC screening was examined using multivariable logistic regression.
Results: Among 38,044 participants who met inclusion criteria, 47.2% (n = 17,950), 49.9% (n = 18,989), and 2.9% (n = 1105) had adequate, marginal, and limited HL, respectively. Lower HL levels were associated with lower adherence to USPSTF CRC screening recommendations: 73.3% for adequate, 68.0% for marginal, and 48.9% for limited HL (p < 0.01). Respondents with limited HL were 45% less likely to undergo CRC screening (OR = 0.55; 95%CI: 0.48-0.63). A significant interaction (p < 0.01) between health literacy and sex was identified. CRC screening difference among HL levels was more pronounced for male (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.40-0.79) than female respondents (OR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.52-0.76).
Conclusion: Limited health literacy is associated with significantly lower rates of appropriate CRC screening, particularly for males. This three-question HL measure provides a clinically applicable tool to identify people at risk for lack of CRC screening.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer is a multidisciplinary medium for the publication of novel research pertaining to cancers arising from the gastrointestinal tract.The journal is dedicated to the most rapid publication possible.The journal publishes papers in all relevant fields, emphasizing those studies that are helpful in understanding and treating cancers affecting the esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder and biliary tree, pancreas, small bowel, large bowel, rectum, and anus. In addition, the Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer publishes basic and translational scientific information from studies providing insight into the etiology and progression of cancers affecting these organs. New insights are provided from diverse areas of research such as studies exploring pre-neoplastic states, risk factors, epidemiology, genetics, preclinical therapeutics, surgery, radiation therapy, novel medical therapeutics, clinical trials, and outcome studies.In addition to reports of original clinical and experimental studies, the journal also publishes: case reports, state-of-the-art reviews on topics of immediate interest or importance; invited articles analyzing particular areas of pancreatic research and knowledge; perspectives in which critical evaluation and conflicting opinions about current topics may be expressed; meeting highlights that summarize important points presented at recent meetings; abstracts of symposia and conferences; book reviews; hypotheses; Letters to the Editors; and other items of special interest, including:Complex Cases in GI Oncology: This is a new initiative to provide a forum to review and discuss the history and management of complex and involved gastrointestinal oncology cases. The format will be similar to a teaching case conference where a case vignette is presented and is followed by a series of questions and discussion points. A brief reference list supporting the points made in discussion would be expected.