Barriers to healthcare seeking, beliefs about cancer and the role of socio-economic position. A Danish population-based study

AbstractBackgroundCancer-related health behaviours may be affected by barriers to healthcare seeking and beliefs about cancer. The aim was to assess anticipated barriers to healthcare seeking and beliefs about cancer in a sample of the Danish population and to assess the association with socio-economic position.MethodsA population-based telephone interview with 3000 randomly sampled persons aged 30years or older was performed using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer measure from 31 May to 4 July 2011. The Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer measure includes statements about four anticipated barriers to healthcare seeking and three positively and three negatively framed beliefs about cancer. For all persons, register-based information on socio-economic position was obtained through Statistics Denmark.ResultsTwo anticipated barriers, worry about what the doctor might find and worry about wasting the doctor's time, were present among 27% and 15% of the respondents, respectively. Overall, a high proportion of respondents concurred with positive beliefs about cancer; fewer concurred with negative beliefs. Having a low educational level and a low household income were strongly associated with having negative beliefs about cancer.ConclusionThe fact that worry about what the doctor might find and worry about wasting the doctor's time were commonly reported barriers call for initiatives in general practice. The association between low educational level and low household income and negative beliefs about cancer might to some degree explain the negative socio-economic gradient in cancer outcome

Negative cancer beliefs, recognition of cancer symptoms and anticipated times to help-seeking: an international cancer benchmarking partnership (ICBP) study

Background: Understanding what influences people to seek help can inform interventions to promote earlier diagnosis of cancer, and ultimately better cancer survival. We aimed to examine relationships between negative cancer beliefs, recognition of cancer symptoms and how long people think they would take to go to the doctor with possible cancer symptoms (anticipated patient intervals). Methods: Telephone interviews of 20,814 individuals (50+) in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Sweden were carried out using the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer Measure (ABC). ABC included items on cancer beliefs, recognition of cancer symptoms and anticipated time to help-seeking for cough and rectal bleeding. The anticipated time to help-seeking was dichotomised as over one month for persistent cough and over one week for rectal bleeding. Results: Not recognising persistent cough/hoarseness and unexplained bleeding as cancer symptoms increased the likelihood of a longer anticipated patient interval for persistent cough (OR=1.66; 95%CI=1.47-1.87) and rectal bleeding (OR=1.90; 95%CI=1.58-2.30), respectively. Endorsing four or more out of six negative beliefs about cancer increased the likelihood of longer anticipated patient intervals for persistent cough and rectal bleeding (OR=2.18; 95%CI=1.71-2.78 and OR=1.97; 95%CI=1.51-2.57). Many negative beliefs about cancer moderated the relationship between not recognising unexplained bleeding as a cancer symptom and longer anticipated patient interval for rectal bleeding (p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Intervention studies should address both negative beliefs about cancer and knowledge of symptoms to optimise the effect

Measurement properties of the Danish version of the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer (ABC) measure

Abstract Background The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership aims to study international differences in cancer survival and the possible causes. Participating countries are Australia, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the UK and a particular focus area is differences in awareness and beliefs about cancer. In this connection, the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer (ABC) measure has been translated into multiple languages. The aim of this study is to appraise the translation process and measurement properties of the Danish version of the ABC measure. Methods The translation process included forward and backward translations and a pilot-test. Data quality was assessed using survey data from 3000 Danish respondents and content validity indexes were calculated based on judgments from ten academic researchers. Construct validity was determined by a confirmative factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analyses (EFA) using survey data and a known group comparison analysis including 56 persons. Test-retest reliability was assessed based on responses from 123 person whom completed the interview twice with an interval of 2–3 weeks. Results The translation process resulted in a Danish ABC measure conceptually equivalent to the English ABC measure. Data quality was acceptable in relation to non-response to individual items which was maximum 0.3%, but the percentage of respondents answering ‘don’t know’ was above 3% for 16 out of 48 items. Content validity indexes showed that items adequately reflected and represented the constructs to be measured (item content validity indexes: 0.9–1.0; construct content validity indexes: 0.8–1.0). The hypothesised factor structure could not be replicated by a CFA, but EFA on each individual subscale showed that six out of seven subscales were unidimensional. The ABC measure discriminated well between non-medical academics and medical academics, but had some difficulties in discriminating between educational groups. Test–retest reliability was moderate to substantial for most items. Conclusions The Danish ABC measure is a useful measurement that is accepted and understood by the target group and with accepted measurement criteria for content validity and test-retest reliability. Future studies may further explore the factorial structure of the ABC measure and should focus on improving the response categories