[Why Me? - Causal Attributions and their Relation to Socio-Economic Status and Stigmatization in Breast, Colon, Prostate and Lung Cancer Patients].

BACKGROUND

Causal attributions can result in self-incrimination and psychosocial burden. Therefore, the present study assessed assumptions about subjective causes of cancer and examines their relationships with social factors and perceived stigmatization.

METHODS

In a bicentric study, 858 patients with breast, colon, prostate or lung cancer were given standardized questionnaires. Of these, n=815 were included in the analyses. Causal attributions were assessed using a set of 17 items including main causes of cancer. Stigmatization was assessed with the Social Impact Scale (SIS-D). The data are evaluated uni-and multivariable.

RESULTS

The mean age is 60 years, 54% are male. The majority of the patients (95%) state multiple causes of their disease. Environment is considered to be the most important influencing factor (M=3.0) by all cancer sites. The lowest influence is attributed to guilt/god's punishment (M=1.1). Causal attributions which are due to the lifestyle factors showed no higher correlations with stigmatizing attitudes than external attributions (r=0.07-0.38). Psychosocial factors (Beta=- 0.051 bis -0.086), smoking (Beta=- 0.087) and guilt/god's punishment (Beta=- 0.023) have been stated lowest in patients with high income. The lower the education of the patient the higher rated is the influence of contagion (Beta=- 0.019).

CONCLUSION

Actual cancer risks are only partially taken into account as disease causes (e. g. nutrition), while others are underestimated (e. g. alcohol). Future cancer education interventions should focus on low-educated patients.