Personal Communication in Primary and Secondary Cancer Prevention: Evolving Discussions, Emerging Challenges

Abstract

Over the past several years, the science of cancer communication has been recognized as integral to the dissemination of cancer prevention and control strategies in both the general population as well as higher-risk groups. In this article we draw upon current literature and small group discussion in the 2008 Society for Behavioral Medicine Cancer Special Interest Group Pre-Conference Workshop on Cancer Communication to identify current findings, critical challenges, and future opportunities regarding personal communication of primary and secondary prevention of cancer. We organize our article with six critical questions: (1) What are the most important directions of research in this area? (2) Does personal cancer communication work through rational processes, or are affective and nonrational processes also involved? (3) Are our efforts adequate to reach underserved populations? (4) Are naturalistic communicative contexts given adequate consideration? (5) Has the field been adequately informed by social psychological and communication theories? (6) What are the best outcomes to document communication effectiveness? Our goals are to initiate thought and collaborative efforts among communication, public health, and behavioral science experts, as well as to establish research priorities at the interface of communication and cancer prevention and control sciences.

Pilot Study of Skin Cancer Risk Reduction Behaviors, Cancer Communication, and Skin Cancer Beliefs in Hispanics

“…Over half of Hispanics endorsed some confusion about which SC recommendations to follow, and significant proportions of Hispanics compared to NHW agreed with the statement "it seems likely almost everything causes skin cancer" (24%); and "people with skin cancer would have pain or other symptoms prior to diagnosis" (24%). Similarly, in prior work we found NHW reported higher levels of awareness of accurate SC causes, prevention strategies and symptom knowledge, whereas Hispanics reported higher levels of information overload and misconceptions (Hay et al, 2009). While our sample included native born Hispanics, levels of health and cancer information-seeking, as well as misconceptions about cancer may be different among foreign born Hispanics.…”

“…We found relatively high levels of existing communication about cancer in both groups. In prior work, Hispanics reported less exposure to health and cancer information than NHW (Hay et al, 2009). Our findings indicate that populations in the Southwest may be highly receptive to SC educational materials and that they may be motivated to discuss these materials with their families.…”

Pencarian Maklumat Ujian Calitan: Pengaruh Interpersonal Sebagai Pengantara Dalam Hubungan Penggunaan Media Massa dengan Motivasi Menjalani Ujian Calitan (Seeking Information of Pap Smear Test: Interpersonal Influence as a Mediator between The Use of Mass Media and the Motivation to Conduct a Pap Smear Test)

“…Penyampaian maklumat tentang pemeriksaan kanser menerusi pusat kesihatan masyarakat, hospital awam serta gereja didapati berkesan dalam kalangan rakyat Afrika Amerika dan Hispanik. Hay et al (2009) menyatakan bahawa pusat kesihatan masyarakat, hospital awam serta gereja digunakan secara meluas dalam kalangan rakyat Afrika Amerika dan Hispanik untuk menggalakkan masyarakatnya menjalani pemeriksaan kanser. Institusi sosial didapati berkesan meningkatkan pengetahuan, kesedaran serta penglibatan masyarakat terhadap peningkatan tahap kesihatan.…”

Individual Breast Cancer Risk Assessment in Underserved Populations: Integrating Empirical Bioethics and Health Disparities Research

“…52–56 Research on risk communication specifically with underserved minority populations is sparse, but it is clear that risk perception is affected by a variety of factors including knowledge of one’s own family history, health literacy and numeracy (but not necessarily educational level), and religious and cultural beliefs. Studies show that subtle differences in how risk information is framed can significantly affect risk perception and health behavior 57 and that the conceptual frameworks applied by patients to understand risk information are very different from those of clinicians.…”