Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T00:17:50.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Screening: cancer

from Medical topics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2014

By
Kevin D. McCaul  and
Amber R. Koblitz
Edited by
Susan Ayers ,
Andrew Baum ,
Chris McManus ,
Stanton Newman ,
Kenneth Wallston ,
John Weinman  and
Robert West
Kevin D. McCaul
Affiliation:
North Dakota State University
Amber R. Koblitz
Affiliation:
North Dakota State University
Susan Ayers
Affiliation:
University of Sussex
Andrew Baum
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Chris McManus
Affiliation:
St Mary's Hospital Medical School
Stanton Newman
Affiliation:
University College and Middlesex School of Medicine
Kenneth Wallston
Affiliation:
Vanderbilt University School of Nursing
John Weinman
Affiliation:
United Medical and Dental Schools of Guy's and St Thomas's
Robert West
Affiliation:
St George's Hospital Medical School, University of London
Get access

Summary

Secondary prevention, or the early discovery of cancer through screening, is based on the idea that identifying a disease before symptoms develop will enable early treatment and extended survival. Screening tests to detect cancer have increased in number over the last decade, and technological advances are certain to produce many more such tests in the decade ahead. In fact, the development of technologies useful for cancer detection has outpaced research demonstrating the value of those new technologies. As a consequence, different screening tests are associated with different levels of uncertainty about whether they can accurately detect cancer and reduce deaths from cancer.

Reducing cancer deaths is an important goal. Cancer is the second leading cause of death in industrialized countries (ACS, 2004a), cancer treatment often creates significant psychological and physical suffering, and survivors continue to show poorer health outcomes compared to people who have not experienced cancer for years after treatment (Yabroff et al., 2004) (see ‘Cancer: general’). Given the potential importance of cancer screening in reducing mortality, we raise four questions: (a) What effective cancer screening tests are available? (b) How can we encourage people to adopt cancer screening behaviours? (c) What are the psychological consequences of cancer screening? and (d) What are the important directions for future psychological research concerning cancer screening?

Cancer screening technologies

An ideal cancer screening technique is reliable and accurate, carries little or no risk, allows for early detection which can lead to cancer prevention, and is inexpensive.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Psychology, Health and Medicine , pp. 857 - 861
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Cancer Society, Inc. (2004a). Cancer facts & figures 2004. Retrieved December 2, 2004, from http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CAFF_finalPWSecured.pdf.
American Cancer Society, Inc. (2004b). Cancer prevention & early detection facts & figures 2004. Retrieved December 2, 2004, from http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CPED2004PWSecured.pdf.
Aro, A. R., Absetz, S. P., Elderen, T. M.et al. (2000). False-positive findings in mammography screening induces short-term distress – breast cancer-specific concern prevails longer. European Journal of Cancer, 36, 1089–97.Google Scholar
Burman, M. L., Taplin, S. H., Herta, D. F. & Elmore, J. G. (1999). Effect of false-positive mammograms on interval breast cancer screening in a health maintenance organization. Annals of Internal Medicine, 131, 1–6.Google Scholar
Clark, M. A., Rakowski, W., Ehrich, B.et al. (2002). The effect of a stage-matched and tailored intervention on repeat mammography (1). American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 22, 1–7.Google Scholar
Costanza, M. E., Stoddard, A. M., Luckmann, R.et al. (2000). Promoting mammography: results of a randomized trial of telephone counseling and a medical practice intervention. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19, 39–46.Google Scholar
Cunningham, L. L., Andrykowski, M. A., Wilson, J. F.et al. (1998). Physical symptoms, distress, and breast cancer risk perceptions in women with benign breast problems. Health Psychology, 17, 371–5.Google Scholar
Curry, S. J., Byers, T. & Hewitt, M. (Eds.). (2003). Fulfilling the potential of cancer prevention and early detection. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Elwood, M., McNoe, B., Smith, T., Bandaranayake, M. & Doyle, T. C. (1998). Once is enough – why some women do not continue to participate in a breast cancer screening programme. The New Zealand Medical Journal, 111, 180–3.Google Scholar
Ford, M. E., Havstad, S. L., Flickinger, L. & Johnson, C. C. (2003). Examining the effects of false positive lung cancer screening results on subsequent lung cancer screening adherence. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 12, 28–33.Google Scholar
Fox, S. A. & Stein, J. A. (1991). The effect of physician-patient communication on mammography utilization by different ethnic groups. Medical Care, 29, 1065–82.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (2000). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. In Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (Eds.) Choices, values, and frames. (pp. 17–43). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Katapodi, M. C., Lee, K. A., Facione, N. C. & Dodd, M. J. (2004). Predictor of perceived breast cancer risk and the relation between perceived risk and breast cancer screening: a meta-analytic review. Preventive Medicine, 38, 388–402.Google Scholar
Legler, J., Meissner, H. I., Coyne, C.et al. (2002). The effectiveness of interventions to promote mammography among women with historically lower rates of screening. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers, and Prevention, 11, 59–71.Google Scholar
Lerman, C., Rimer, B., Trock, B., Balshem, A. & Engstrom, P. F. (1990). Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Preventive Medicine, 19, 279–90.Google Scholar
Lerman, C., Trock, B., Rimer, B. K.et al. (1991). Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Annals of Internal Medicine, 114, 657–61.Google Scholar
Leventhal, H., Leventhal, E. A. & Cameron, L. (2001). Representations, procedures, and affect in illness self-regulation: a perceptual–cognitive model. In Baum, A., Revenson, T. A. & Singer, J. E. (Eds.). Handbook of health psychology, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mandel, J. S., Bond, J. H., Church, T. R.et al. (1993). Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. New England Journal of Medicine, 328, 1365–71.Google Scholar
McCaffery, K., Wardle, J., Nadel, M. & Atkin, W. (2002). Socioeconomic variation in participation in colorectal cancer screening. Journal of Medical Screening, 9, 104–8.Google Scholar
McCaul, K. D., Branstetter, A. D., Schroeder, D. M. & Glasgow, R. E. (1996). What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review. Health Psychology, 15, 1–8.Google Scholar
Meissner, H. I., Smith, R. A., Rimer, B. K.et al. (2004). Promoting cancer screening: learning from experience. Cancer, 101, 1107–17.Google Scholar
Miller, S. M., Shoda, Y. & Hurley, K. (1996). Applying cognitive–social theory to health-protective behavior: breast self-examination in cancer screening. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 70–94.Google Scholar
Myers, R. (in press). Decision counseling in cancer prevention and control. Health Psychology. Special Issue: Basic and Applied Decision Making in Cancer Control. 24(4 suppl.), S71–7.
Rakowski, W., Breen, N., Meissner, H.et al. (2004). Prevalence and correlates of repeat mammography among woman aged 55–79 in the Year 2000. National Health Interview Survey. Preventive Medicine, 39, 1–10.Google Scholar
Rakowski, W., Dube, C. E., Marcus, B. H.et al. (1992). Assessing elements of women's decisions about mammography. Health Psychology, 11, 111–18.Google Scholar
Rimer, B. K., Briss, P. A., Zeller, P. K., Chan, E. C. & Woolf, S. H. (2004). Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening?Cancer, 101, 1214–28.Google Scholar
Rothman, A. J. (2000). Toward a theory-based analysis of behavioral maintenance. Health Psychology, 19, 64–9.Google Scholar
Sirovich, B. E., Schwartz, L. M. & Woloshin, S. (2003). Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States: does practice reflect the evidence?Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 1414–20.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99–119.Google Scholar
Skaer, T. L., Robison, L. M., Sclar, D. A. & Harding, G. H. (1996). Financial incentive and the use of mammography among Hispanic migrants to the United States. Health Care for Women International, 17, 281–91.Google Scholar
Skinner, C. S., Campbell, M. K., Rimer, B. K., Curry, S. & Prochaska, J. O. (1999). How effective is tailored print communication?Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 21, 290–8.Google Scholar
Strecher, V. J., Champion, V. L. & Rosenstock, I. W. (1997). In Gochman, D. S. (Ed.). Handbook of health behavior research I: Personal and social determinants (pp. 71–91). Plenum Press, New York.
Swan, J., Breen, J., Coates, R. J., Rimer, B. K. & Lee, N. C. (2003). Progress in cancer screening practices. Cancer, 97, 1528–40.Google Scholar
Wardle, F. J., Collins, W., Pernet, A. L.et al. (1993). Psychological impact of screening for familial ovarian cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85, 653–7.Google Scholar
Weinstein, N. D. (1988). The precaution adoption process. Health Psychology, 7, 355–86.Google Scholar
Weinstein, N. D. (1993). Testing four competing theories of health-protective behavior. Health Psychology, 12, 324–33.Google Scholar
Yabroff, K. R., Lawrence, W. F., Clauser, S., Davis, W. W. & Brown, M. L. (2004). Burden of illness in cancer survivors: findings from a population-based national sample. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 96, 1322–30.Google Scholar
Yarbough, S. S. & Braden, C. J. (2001). Utility of health belief model as a guide for explaining or predicting breast cancer screening behaviours. Journal of Advances in Nursing, 33, 677–88.Google Scholar
Zapka, J. G. & Lemon, S. C. (2004). Interventions for patients, providers, and health care organizations. Cancer (Suppl.), 101, 1165–87.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×