Why do people avoid health risk information? A qualitative analysis

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SSM. Qualitative research in health Pub Date : 2024-07-21 DOI:10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100461
Abigail G. O'Brien , William B. Meese , Jennifer M. Taber , Angela E. Johnson , Bianca M. Hinojosa , Raven Burton , Sheemrun Ranjan , Evelyn D. Rodarte , Charlie Coward , Jennifer L. Howell
{"title":"Why do people avoid health risk information? A qualitative analysis","authors":"Abigail G. O'Brien ,&nbsp;William B. Meese ,&nbsp;Jennifer M. Taber ,&nbsp;Angela E. Johnson ,&nbsp;Bianca M. Hinojosa ,&nbsp;Raven Burton ,&nbsp;Sheemrun Ranjan ,&nbsp;Evelyn D. Rodarte ,&nbsp;Charlie Coward ,&nbsp;Jennifer L. Howell","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Despite the potential benefit of receiving personalized health risk information, when given the opportunity to learn their risk, some people avoid that information. An extensive body of research has revealed various reasons for such information avoidance. Most of this existing work has used quantitative methods, with less focus on self-reported reasons for avoiding health risk information. We used a content analysis approach across four datasets (Dataset 1: <em>n</em> = 174, Dataset 2: <em>n</em> = 326, Dataset 3: <em>n</em> = 83, Dataset 4: <em>n</em> = 168), with the goal of identifying a broad range of self-reported reasons for avoidance. In each study, U.S. adults had the opportunity to learn their personalized risk estimate for a health condition through an online risk calculator (Health condition contexts: Dataset 1: heart disease, stroke, diabetes, prediabetes, lung cancer, colon cancer, melanoma skin cancer, breast cancer, or prostate cancer; Datasets 2 and 3: prediabetes; Dataset 4: melanoma skin cancer, stroke, lung cancer, osteoporosis, prediabetes, or diabetes). Participants who avoided their risk were asked to explain their reason(s) for avoidance via an open-ended question. Coding of these responses resulted in four overarching categories of self-reported reasons for information avoidance: information appraisal, self-perceptions of health, low utility, and affective consequences. The reasons identified both support and extend the current understanding of why people avoid health risk information.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100461"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321524000702/pdfft?md5=d2ec6dd442cb8261b503fa1f5f75436c&pid=1-s2.0-S2667321524000702-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321524000702","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the potential benefit of receiving personalized health risk information, when given the opportunity to learn their risk, some people avoid that information. An extensive body of research has revealed various reasons for such information avoidance. Most of this existing work has used quantitative methods, with less focus on self-reported reasons for avoiding health risk information. We used a content analysis approach across four datasets (Dataset 1: n = 174, Dataset 2: n = 326, Dataset 3: n = 83, Dataset 4: n = 168), with the goal of identifying a broad range of self-reported reasons for avoidance. In each study, U.S. adults had the opportunity to learn their personalized risk estimate for a health condition through an online risk calculator (Health condition contexts: Dataset 1: heart disease, stroke, diabetes, prediabetes, lung cancer, colon cancer, melanoma skin cancer, breast cancer, or prostate cancer; Datasets 2 and 3: prediabetes; Dataset 4: melanoma skin cancer, stroke, lung cancer, osteoporosis, prediabetes, or diabetes). Participants who avoided their risk were asked to explain their reason(s) for avoidance via an open-ended question. Coding of these responses resulted in four overarching categories of self-reported reasons for information avoidance: information appraisal, self-perceptions of health, low utility, and affective consequences. The reasons identified both support and extend the current understanding of why people avoid health risk information.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人们为何回避健康风险信息?定性分析
尽管接受个性化健康风险信息有潜在的好处,但当有机会了解自己的风险时,有些人还是会回避这些信息。大量的研究揭示了这种信息回避的各种原因。现有研究大多采用定量方法,而较少关注回避健康风险信息的自我报告原因。我们在四个数据集(数据集 1:n = 174;数据集 2:n = 326;数据集 3:n = 83;数据集 4:n = 168)中使用了内容分析法,目的是找出广泛的自我报告的回避原因。在每项研究中,美国成年人都有机会通过在线风险计算器了解他们对某种健康状况的个性化风险估计(健康状况背景:数据集 1:心脏病、中风、糖尿病、糖尿病前期、肺癌、结肠癌、黑色素瘤皮肤癌、乳腺癌或前列腺癌;数据集 2 和 3:糖尿病前期;数据集 4:黑色素瘤皮肤癌、中风、肺癌、骨质疏松症、糖尿病前期或糖尿病)。要求规避风险的参与者通过开放式问题解释规避风险的原因。对这些回答进行编码后,得出了四类自我报告的信息回避原因:信息评估、对健康的自我认知、低效用和情感后果。所确定的原因既支持又扩展了目前对人们回避健康风险信息原因的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
163 days
期刊最新文献
Perspectives of Palestinian physicians on the impact of the Gaza War in the West Bank Prenatal care in urban China: Qualitative study on challenges and coping mechanisms Ableism in mental healthcare settings: A qualitative study among U.S. adults with disabilities A methodological review of solicited diaries as a qualitative tool in health research in low- and middle-income countries Reconciling market and moral logics on a minimum wage: Supermarket work in Australia during the first two years of the SARS-COV-2 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1