Evan Keiser, A Michelle Corbett, Onyema Chido-Amajuoyi, Allison Antoine, Carrie Stehman, Isabella Dorn, David Goines, Noelle K LoConte
{"title":"在联邦合格医疗中心服务的黑人/非裔美国患者中,粪便DNA结直肠癌筛查的可接受性","authors":"Evan Keiser, A Michelle Corbett, Onyema Chido-Amajuoyi, Allison Antoine, Carrie Stehman, Isabella Dorn, David Goines, Noelle K LoConte","doi":"10.1007/s13187-025-02631-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) has an increased burden among Black/African-American populations. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, home-based CRC screening options are being used more frequently. We conducted focus groups to understand the acceptability of stool-based DNA testing for CRC screening in this population. Ten focus groups about the acceptability of various CRC screening modalities were held with Black/African-American participants at two federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Participants were separated into focus groups based on age and gender. Thematic analysis was carried out using NVivo. Across the groups, there were a total of 79 participants, of which 40.5% were aged 40-50 years (\"younger participants\"), 59.5% aged > 50 years (\"older participants\"), 53.2% male, and 46.8% female. Overall, knowledge was low regarding perceived risk of CRC. There was limited awareness of CRC screening options among younger patients and widespread lack of knowledge about stool-based DNA testing. Most respondents preferred colonoscopy as their first-choice screening test but were open to other screening tests. Stool-based DNA tests were more preferred among younger participants but was felt to be acceptable across all groups. Given the low awareness/knowledge of screening modalities identified in our study, educational interventions and shared decision making by primary care providers are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptability of Stool-Based DNA Colorectal Cancer Screening among Black/African-American Patients Served by Federally Qualified Health Centers.\",\"authors\":\"Evan Keiser, A Michelle Corbett, Onyema Chido-Amajuoyi, Allison Antoine, Carrie Stehman, Isabella Dorn, David Goines, Noelle K LoConte\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13187-025-02631-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) has an increased burden among Black/African-American populations. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, home-based CRC screening options are being used more frequently. We conducted focus groups to understand the acceptability of stool-based DNA testing for CRC screening in this population. Ten focus groups about the acceptability of various CRC screening modalities were held with Black/African-American participants at two federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Participants were separated into focus groups based on age and gender. Thematic analysis was carried out using NVivo. Across the groups, there were a total of 79 participants, of which 40.5% were aged 40-50 years (\\\"younger participants\\\"), 59.5% aged > 50 years (\\\"older participants\\\"), 53.2% male, and 46.8% female. Overall, knowledge was low regarding perceived risk of CRC. There was limited awareness of CRC screening options among younger patients and widespread lack of knowledge about stool-based DNA testing. Most respondents preferred colonoscopy as their first-choice screening test but were open to other screening tests. Stool-based DNA tests were more preferred among younger participants but was felt to be acceptable across all groups. Given the low awareness/knowledge of screening modalities identified in our study, educational interventions and shared decision making by primary care providers are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"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/s13187-025-02631-0\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02631-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Acceptability of Stool-Based DNA Colorectal Cancer Screening among Black/African-American Patients Served by Federally Qualified Health Centers.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) has an increased burden among Black/African-American populations. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, home-based CRC screening options are being used more frequently. We conducted focus groups to understand the acceptability of stool-based DNA testing for CRC screening in this population. Ten focus groups about the acceptability of various CRC screening modalities were held with Black/African-American participants at two federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Participants were separated into focus groups based on age and gender. Thematic analysis was carried out using NVivo. Across the groups, there were a total of 79 participants, of which 40.5% were aged 40-50 years ("younger participants"), 59.5% aged > 50 years ("older participants"), 53.2% male, and 46.8% female. Overall, knowledge was low regarding perceived risk of CRC. There was limited awareness of CRC screening options among younger patients and widespread lack of knowledge about stool-based DNA testing. Most respondents preferred colonoscopy as their first-choice screening test but were open to other screening tests. Stool-based DNA tests were more preferred among younger participants but was felt to be acceptable across all groups. Given the low awareness/knowledge of screening modalities identified in our study, educational interventions and shared decision making by primary care providers are needed.
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.