Suppr超能文献

评估纳入 MC1R 遗传风险信息的黑色素瘤精准预防材料。

Assessment of melanoma precision prevention materials incorporating MC1R genetic risk information.

机构信息

Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.

SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.

出版信息

Transl Behav Med. 2022 May 26;12(5):683-687. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibac034.

Abstract

Few studies have examined cognitive responses to mailed precision prevention materials. MC1R is a robust, well-described melanoma susceptibility marker. The purpose was to assess cognitive responses to generic or precision prevention materials incorporating MC1R genetic risk. Non-Hispanic White participants (n = 1134) enrolled in a randomized controlled trial received either precision prevention materials incorporating MC1R genetic risk (higher/average) or generic prevention (standard) materials. Six months after baseline, 808 (71.3%) participants reported on the amount of prevention materials read (5-point scale); believability and clarity of materials; intention to change preventive behaviors (7-point Likert scale); and recall of their MC1R genetic risk. Comparisons were conducted using Kruskal-Wallis and chi-squared tests. Overall, participants read most to all (Mdn = 4, IQR = 2) of the prevention materials, reported high believability (Mdn = 7, IQR = 1) and clarity (Mdn = 7, IQR = 1), and moderate intention to change preventive behaviors (Mdn = 5, IQR = 2). Higher-risk participants reported slightly less clarity (Mdn = 6, IQR = 2) than either average-risk (Mdn = 6, IQR = 1, p = 2.50 × 10-3) or standard participants (Mdn = 7, IQR = 1, p = 2.30 × 10-5); and slightly less believability (Mdn = 6, IQR = 1) than standard participants (Mdn = 7, IQR = 1, p = .005). Higher-risk participants were 2.21 times as likely (95% CI = 1.43-3.43) to misremember or forget their risk compared to average-risk participants; misremembering was observed only among higher-risk participants (14%). Mailed precision prevention information were mostly read, highly believable and clear, and resulted in moderate levels of intention to change sun protection behaviors, bolstering the feasibility of population-level precision prevention. Defensive reactions may explain lower clarity, believability, and higher incorrect risk recall among higher-risk participants.

摘要

很少有研究检查过对邮寄的精准预防材料的认知反应。MC1R 是一个强大的、描述良好的黑色素瘤易感性标志物。本研究的目的是评估对包含 MC1R 遗传风险的通用或精准预防材料的认知反应。非西班牙裔白人参与者(n=1134)被纳入一项随机对照试验,他们收到了包含 MC1R 遗传风险(高/平均)或通用预防(标准)材料的精准预防材料。在基线后 6 个月,808 名(71.3%)参与者报告了阅读预防材料的数量(5 分制);材料的可信度和清晰度;改变预防行为的意图(7 分李克特量表);以及对其 MC1R 遗传风险的回忆。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 和卡方检验进行比较。总体而言,参与者阅读了大部分(Mdn=4,IQR=2)的预防材料,报告了高可信度(Mdn=7,IQR=1)和清晰度(Mdn=7,IQR=1),并适度改变预防行为的意图(Mdn=5,IQR=2)。高风险参与者报告的清晰度略低(Mdn=6,IQR=2),低于平均风险(Mdn=6,IQR=1,p=2.50×10-3)或标准参与者(Mdn=7,IQR=1,p=2.30×10-5);并且可信度略低(Mdn=6,IQR=1),低于标准参与者(Mdn=7,IQR=1,p=0.005)。与平均风险参与者相比,高风险参与者记错或忘记风险的可能性高 2.21 倍(95%CI=1.43-3.43);仅在高风险参与者中观察到记错(14%)。邮寄的精准预防信息大多被阅读,高度可信且清晰,并导致适度改变防晒行为的意图,支持了人群精准预防的可行性。防御反应可能解释了高风险参与者中较低的清晰度、可信度和较高的错误风险回忆。

相似文献

1
Assessment of melanoma precision prevention materials incorporating MC1R genetic risk information.
Transl Behav Med. 2022 May 26;12(5):683-687. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibac034.
2
Assessment of skin cancer precision prevention materials among Hispanics in Florida and Puerto Rico.
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Oct;105(10):3143-3150. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.06.012. Epub 2022 Jun 26.
7
Marshaling the Translational Potential of for Precision Risk Assessment of Melanoma.
Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2018 Mar;11(3):121-124. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-17-0255. Epub 2017 Dec 15.
10
Melanoma genetic testing, counseling, and adherence to skin cancer prevention and detection behaviors.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013 Apr;22(4):607-14. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-1174. Epub 2013 Feb 7.

引用本文的文献

3
Assessment of skin cancer precision prevention materials among Hispanics in Florida and Puerto Rico.
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Oct;105(10):3143-3150. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.06.012. Epub 2022 Jun 26.

本文引用的文献

4
Effects of health literacy skills, educational attainment, and level of melanoma risk on responses to personalized genomic testing.
Patient Educ Couns. 2021 Jan;104(1):12-19. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.07.019. Epub 2020 Aug 1.
5
Behavioral impact of return of genetic test results for complex disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Health Psychol. 2018 Dec;37(12):1134-1144. doi: 10.1037/hea0000683. Epub 2018 Oct 11.
7
Translation and adaptation of skin cancer genomic risk education materials for implementation in primary care.
J Community Genet. 2017 Jan;8(1):53-63. doi: 10.1007/s12687-016-0287-z. Epub 2016 Dec 6.
9
Melanoma genetic testing, counseling, and adherence to skin cancer prevention and detection behaviors.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013 Apr;22(4):607-14. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-1174. Epub 2013 Feb 7.
10
Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: an assessment of genetic counselors' knowledge and beliefs.
Genet Med. 2011 Apr;13(4):325-32. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3182011636.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验