Disparities in Cervical Cancer Knowledge and Trust in Information Sources Among Diverse American Women.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Cancer Education Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1007/s13187-024-02534-6
Payton J Smith, Sherrie Flynt Wallington
{"title":"Disparities in Cervical Cancer Knowledge and Trust in Information Sources Among Diverse American Women.","authors":"Payton J Smith, Sherrie Flynt Wallington","doi":"10.1007/s13187-024-02534-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cervical cancer rates have declined due to prevention and screening, but disparities remain. This study examines how trust and preference in information sources affect knowledge and behaviors, alongside demographic differences to identify health disparities. This study used Health Information National Trends Survey data and employed weighted chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression to analyze associations between knowledge, behaviors, and demographic differences. The results revealed significant disparities in HPV awareness, with lower awareness among Black (OR, 0.521), Hispanic (OR, 0.398), and Asian (OR, 0.138) women compared to Whites. Age and education also played roles, as older and less-educated women were less informed. Trust in doctors was crucial; women with low trust in doctors (aOR, 0.499; 95% CI, 0.252-0.989) had lower odds of having heard of HPV. Preference for written materials as a primary information source (aOR, 0.312; 95% CI, 0.122-0.793) also correlated with lower HPV awareness compared to preferring information from doctors. Furthermore, women with low trust in charity organizations (aOR, 0.647; 95% CI, 0.461-0.909) were less likely to believe HPV causes cervical cancer, while those who preferred the internet as an information source (aOR, 1.544; 95% CI, 1.026-2.324) had higher odds of having heard of HPV compared to those preferring doctors. Minority populations, older women, and those with lower education levels had significantly lower HPV knowledge. These findings highlight the need for tailored communication, community outreach, policy initiatives, culturally sensitive approaches, digital health interventions, and strategies promoting patient-provider trust to address these disparities.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-024-02534-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cervical cancer rates have declined due to prevention and screening, but disparities remain. This study examines how trust and preference in information sources affect knowledge and behaviors, alongside demographic differences to identify health disparities. This study used Health Information National Trends Survey data and employed weighted chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression to analyze associations between knowledge, behaviors, and demographic differences. The results revealed significant disparities in HPV awareness, with lower awareness among Black (OR, 0.521), Hispanic (OR, 0.398), and Asian (OR, 0.138) women compared to Whites. Age and education also played roles, as older and less-educated women were less informed. Trust in doctors was crucial; women with low trust in doctors (aOR, 0.499; 95% CI, 0.252-0.989) had lower odds of having heard of HPV. Preference for written materials as a primary information source (aOR, 0.312; 95% CI, 0.122-0.793) also correlated with lower HPV awareness compared to preferring information from doctors. Furthermore, women with low trust in charity organizations (aOR, 0.647; 95% CI, 0.461-0.909) were less likely to believe HPV causes cervical cancer, while those who preferred the internet as an information source (aOR, 1.544; 95% CI, 1.026-2.324) had higher odds of having heard of HPV compared to those preferring doctors. Minority populations, older women, and those with lower education levels had significantly lower HPV knowledge. These findings highlight the need for tailored communication, community outreach, policy initiatives, culturally sensitive approaches, digital health interventions, and strategies promoting patient-provider trust to address these disparities.

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
美国不同族裔妇女在宫颈癌知识和对信息来源信任度方面的差异。
宫颈癌发病率因预防和筛查而有所下降,但差异依然存在。本研究探讨了对信息来源的信任和偏好如何影响知识和行为,以及人口统计学差异对健康差异的影响。本研究使用了全国健康信息趋势调查数据,并采用加权卡方检验和多元逻辑回归分析了知识、行为和人口统计学差异之间的关联。结果显示,与白人相比,黑人(OR, 0.521)、西班牙裔(OR, 0.398)和亚裔(OR, 0.138)妇女对 HPV 的认识程度较低。年龄和受教育程度也有影响,年龄较大和受教育程度较低的女性了解的信息较少。对医生的信任至关重要;对医生信任度低的女性(aOR,0.499;95% CI,0.252-0.989)听说过 HPV 的几率较低。与偏好从医生那里获得信息相比,偏好将书面材料作为主要信息来源(aOR,0.312;95% CI,0.122-0.793)也与HPV知晓率较低有关。此外,对慈善机构信任度较低的妇女(aOR,0.647;95% CI,0.461-0.909)更不可能相信 HPV 会导致宫颈癌,而那些更喜欢将互联网作为信息来源的妇女(aOR,1.544;95% CI,1.026-2.324)与更喜欢医生的妇女相比,听说过 HPV 的几率更高。少数民族、老年妇女和教育水平较低的妇女对 HPV 的了解程度明显较低。这些发现凸显了有必要采取有针对性的沟通、社区宣传、政策措施、文化敏感性方法、数字健康干预措施和促进患者-提供者信任的策略来解决这些差异。
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
Journal of Cancer Education
Journal of Cancer Education 医学-医学:信息
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
122
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues. Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care. We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts. Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited. Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants. Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.
期刊最新文献
2024 International Cancer Education Conference Abstracts. Are Sport and Exercise Science Students Receiving Enough Training to Adequately Design Exercise Programs for Patients with Cancer, Overweight, or Obesity in Spain? A Comprehensive Archival and Survey Analysis of 52 Spanish Universities. Implementation of an Educational Intervention for Gastric Cancer Awareness in the General Population in CELAC and Europe: A Strategy Proposed by the LEGACy Consortium. The Impact of Providing Evidence-Based Arabic Educational Resources to Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy in Saudi Arabia. Transitioning from Health Disparities to Health Equity.
×
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