Mammography screening test: how users receive information and how they want to be informed

Main Article Content

Violeta Luque-Ribelles
Alicia Quílez Cutillas
Petra Rosado Varela
José Manuel Baena

Abstract

There is currently intense international debate about the benefits of offering breast cancer
screening tests (BCST) to all women aged 50 and older, as it is not clear that they outweigh the risks. Also, public perception is unrealistic. Participants overestimate the benefits and are oblivious to the negative physical or psychological impact of overdiagnosis and false positives. In addition, there is no clear strategy to make easier for them to make informed decisions about their participation in the test. In this context, a deliberative democracy (DD) process was carried out in Cadiz (Spain) with the dual objective of knowing the opinion of the participants on the PCCM; and knowing which strategies they consider would improve the information reception process and facilitate informed decision making. Participated thirteen women between the ages of 50 and 65. The DD process took place over three afternoons: (1) information on mammographic screening was provided; (2) arguments were
given for and against the PCCM; and (3) participants deliberated on the information provided, and proposed changes to the information they receive. Participants expressed their opinion about the BCST in terms of its objectives, the sources of information, and the people to whom it is addressed, the clarity of the information, and when and how they receive it. They also indicated how they would like to receive information about the BCST
–mode of arrival—, the moment, the contents about which they would like to be informed, the target persons and the action protocol. It is concluded that it is necessary to know the point of view of the participants about the information that they receive of the BCST in order to improve their quality and adapt it to their needs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Luque-Ribelles, V., Quílez Cutillas, A., Rosado Varela, P., & Baena, J. M. (2019). Mammography screening test: how users receive information and how they want to be informed. International Journal of Developmental and Educational Psychology. Revista INFAD De Psicología., 5(1), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.17060/ijodaep.2019.n1.v5.1577
Section
Articles
Author Biographies

Violeta Luque-Ribelles, Universidad de Cádiz

Departamento de Psicología

Alicia Quílez Cutillas, Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar

Servicio de Oncología Médica

José Manuel Baena, Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar

Servicio de Oncología Médica

References

Active Citizenship Network. (2002). Carta Europea de los derechos de los pacientes. Roma

Baena-Cañada, J.M., Rosado-Varela, P., Expósito-Álvarez, I., González-Guerrero, M., Nieto-Vera, J., & Benítez-Rodríguez, E. (2014). Women’s perceptions of breast cancer screening. Spanish

screening programme survey. The Breast, 23, 883-8. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2014.09.010

Biller-Adorno, N., & Jüni, P. (2014). Abolishing mammography screening programs? A view from the Swiss Medical Board. NEJM, 22; 370(21):1965-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1401875

Gigerenzer, G., Mata, J., & Frank, R. (2009). Public Knowledge of Benefits of Breast and Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe. JNCI, 101, 1216-20.

Gøtzsche, P.C. (2015). Mammography screening is harmful and should be abandoned. J R Soc Med., 108(9), 341–5. doi: 10.1177/0141076815602452.

Harris, R.P., Wilt, T.J., & Qaseem, A. (2015). High Value Care Task Force of the American College of Physicians. A value framework for cancer screening: advice for high-value care from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med, 162(10), 712-7. doi 10.7326/M14-2327.

Hendriks, C., 2002. The ambiguous role of civil society in deliberative democracy. In: Australasian Political Studies Association Conference. ANU, Canberra.

Hoffmann, T.C., & Del Mar, C. (2015). Patients’ expectations of the benefits and harms of treatments, screening, and tests: a systematic review. JAMA Intern Med; 175, 274-86. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.6016.

Irwig, L., & Glasciou, P. (2000). Informed consent for screening by community sampling. Effective Clin Pract, 3, 47–50.

Jimbo, M., Rana, G.K., Hawley, S., Holmes-Rovner, M., Kelly-Blake, K., Nease, D.E. Jr., et al. (2013). What is lacking in current decision aids on cancer screening? CA Cancer J Clin , 63(3), 193–214.

doi:10.3322/caac.21180.

Jørgensen, K.J., & Gøtzsche P.C. (2006). Content of invitations for publicly funded screening mammography. BMJ, 332, 538-41.

Lauby-Secretan, B., Scoccianti, C., Loomis, D., Benbrahim-Tallaa, L., Bouvard, V., Bianchini, F., et al. (2015). For the International Agency for Research on Cancer Working Group. Breast-Cancer Screening — Viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med, 372, 2353-8. DOI:10.1056/NEJMsr1504363.

Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Føllesdal, A., et al., 2010. The place of selfinterest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy 18, 64e100

Márquez, S., y Lacalle, J.R. (2013). Beneficios y efectos adversos del cribado de cáncer de mama: revisión de la evidencia científica. Secretaría General de Salud Pública, Inclusión Social y Calidad de Vida. Consejería de Salud y Bienestar Social.

Porroche-Escudero, A. (2017). Problematizando la desinformación en las campañas de concienciación sobre el cáncer de mama. Gaceta Sanitaria, 1383.

REDECAN (2019). http://redecan.org/es/page.cfm?id=21&title=estadisticas

Sebastián, J., Manos, D., Bueno, M.J., y Mateos, N. (2007). Imagen corporal y autoestima en mujeres con cáncer de mama participantes en un programa de intervención psicosocial. Clínica y

salud, 18(2), 137-161.

Stacey, D., Légaré, F., Col, N.F., Bennett, C.L., Barry, M.J., Eden, K.B., et al. (2014). Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 28(1).

CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4.

Schwartz, L.M., Woloshin, S., Sox, H.C., Fischhoff, B., Welch, H.G. (2000). US women’s attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional

survey. BMJ, 320, 1635-40.

Strauss, A., y Corbin, J. (1998). Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada. Colombia: Universidad de Antioquia.

Taylor, S. (2003). Psicología de la salud. México: McGraw Hill

Valls-Llobet, C. (2009). Mujeres, salud y poder. Universitat de Valencia: Cátedra.

Wilkinson, S. (2008). Mujeres feministas en lucha contra el cáncer de mama: lo personal y lo político.Anuario de Psicología, 39(1), 23-39.