@article{ref1,
title="Testing whether barriers to a hypothetical screening test affect unrelated perceived benefits and vice versa: a randomised, experimental study",
journal="Patient education and counseling",
year="2016",
author="Ghanouni, Alex and Nuttall, Ella and Wardle, Jane and von Wagner, Christian",
volume="100",
number="2",
pages="e1-e24",
abstract="OBJECTIVE: Determine whether (fictitious) health screening test benefits affect perceptions of (unrelated) barriers, and barriers affect perceptions of benefits. <br><br>METHODS: UK adults were recruited via an online survey panel and randomised to receive a vignette describing a hypothetical screening test with either high or low benefits (higher vs. lower mortality reduction) and high or low barriers (severe vs. mild side-effects; a 2×2 factorial design). ANOVAs compared mean perceived benefits and barriers scores. Screening 'intentions' were compared using Pearson's χ(2) test. <br><br>RESULTS: Benefits were rated less favourably when barriers were high (mean: 27.4, standard deviation: 5.3) than when they were low (M: 28.5, SD: 4.8; p=0.010, partial η(2)=0.031). Barriers were rated more negatively when benefits were low (M: 17.1, SD: 7.6) than when they were high (M: 15.7, SD: 7.3; p=0.023, partial η(2)=0.024). Most intended to have the test in all conditions (73-81%); except for the low benefit-high barrier condition (37%; p<0.0005; N=218). <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of test attributes may be influenced by unrelated characteristics. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Reducing screening test barriers alone may have suboptimal effects on perceptions of barriers if benefits remain low; increasing screening benefits may not improve perceptions of benefits if barriers remain high.<br><br>Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0738-3991",
doi="10.1016/j.pec.2016.09.007",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2016.09.007"
}