Perceived colorectal cancer candidacy and the role of candidacy in colorectal cancer screening

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Risk & Society Pub Date : 2019-10-30 DOI:10.1080/13698575.2019.1680816
A. Bikker, S. Macdonald, K. Robb, Ellie Conway, S. Browne, C. Campbell, D. Weller, R. Steele, U. Macleod
{"title":"Perceived colorectal cancer candidacy and the role of candidacy in colorectal cancer screening","authors":"A. Bikker, S. Macdonald, K. Robb, Ellie Conway, S. Browne, C. Campbell, D. Weller, R. Steele, U. Macleod","doi":"10.1080/13698575.2019.1680816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Screening is a well-established tool to advance earlier cancer diagnosis. We used Davison’s concept of ‘candidacy’ to explore how individuals draw on collectively constructed images of ‘typical’ colorectal cancer (CRC) sufferers, or ‘candidates’, in order to evaluate their own risk and to ascertain the impact of candidacy on screening participation in CRC. We interviewed 61 individuals who were invited to participate in the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme. Of these, 37 were screeners (17 men and 20 women) and 24 non-screeners (13 men and 11 women). To analyse these data we used a coding frame that drew on: symptoms, risk factors, and retrospective and prospective candidacy. Few participants could identify a definite bowel cancer candidate and notions of candidacy were largely predicated on luck in the sense that anyone could be a candidate for CRC and there was little evidence to support a linear relationship between feelings of risk and screening decisions. Often participants described screening as part of a wider portfolio of being healthy and referred to feeling obliged to look after themselves. Our study suggests that rather than candidates for bowel cancer, screeners viewed themselves as candidates for screening by which screening decisions pointed towards the acceptance and normalisation of the rhetoric of personal responsibility for health. These findings have related theoretical and practical implications; the moral structure that underpins the new public health can be witnessed practically in the narratives by which those who see themselves as candidates for screening embrace wider positive health practices.","PeriodicalId":47341,"journal":{"name":"Health Risk & Society","volume":"40 1","pages":"352 - 372"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Risk & Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2019.1680816","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Screening is a well-established tool to advance earlier cancer diagnosis. We used Davison’s concept of ‘candidacy’ to explore how individuals draw on collectively constructed images of ‘typical’ colorectal cancer (CRC) sufferers, or ‘candidates’, in order to evaluate their own risk and to ascertain the impact of candidacy on screening participation in CRC. We interviewed 61 individuals who were invited to participate in the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme. Of these, 37 were screeners (17 men and 20 women) and 24 non-screeners (13 men and 11 women). To analyse these data we used a coding frame that drew on: symptoms, risk factors, and retrospective and prospective candidacy. Few participants could identify a definite bowel cancer candidate and notions of candidacy were largely predicated on luck in the sense that anyone could be a candidate for CRC and there was little evidence to support a linear relationship between feelings of risk and screening decisions. Often participants described screening as part of a wider portfolio of being healthy and referred to feeling obliged to look after themselves. Our study suggests that rather than candidates for bowel cancer, screeners viewed themselves as candidates for screening by which screening decisions pointed towards the acceptance and normalisation of the rhetoric of personal responsibility for health. These findings have related theoretical and practical implications; the moral structure that underpins the new public health can be witnessed practically in the narratives by which those who see themselves as candidates for screening embrace wider positive health practices.
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
认知结直肠癌候选及候选在结直肠癌筛查中的作用
筛查是促进早期癌症诊断的一种行之有效的工具。我们使用戴维森的“候选资格”概念来探索个人如何利用“典型”结直肠癌(CRC)患者或“候选人”的集体构建图像来评估他们自己的风险,并确定候选资格对CRC筛查参与的影响。我们采访了61位被邀请参加苏格兰肠道筛查计划的人。其中37人是筛选者(17名男性和20名女性),24人是非筛选者(13名男性和11名女性)。为了分析这些数据,我们使用了一个编码框架,该框架包括:症状、危险因素、回顾性和前瞻性候选人。很少有参与者能够确定一个明确的肠癌候选人,候选资格的概念在很大程度上取决于运气,因为任何人都可能成为CRC的候选人,几乎没有证据支持风险感觉和筛查决定之间的线性关系。参与者通常将筛查描述为更广泛的健康组合的一部分,并提到有义务照顾自己。我们的研究表明,筛查者将自己视为筛查的候选人,而不是肠癌的候选人,筛查决定指向个人健康责任修辞的接受和正常化。这些发现具有相关的理论和实践意义;支持新公共卫生的道德结构可以从那些认为自己是筛查候选人的人接受更广泛的积极健康做法的叙述中实际看到。
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
3.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Health Risk & Society is an international scholarly journal devoted to a theoretical and empirical understanding of the social processes which influence the ways in which health risks are taken, communicated, assessed and managed. Public awareness of risk is associated with the development of high profile media debates about specific risks. Although risk issues arise in a variety of areas, such as technological usage and the environment, they are particularly evident in health. Not only is health a major issue of personal and collective concern, but failure to effectively assess and manage risk is likely to result in health problems.
期刊最新文献
Risk factors for mental health and wellness: children’s perspectives from five Majority World Countries The role of trust in government and risk perception in adherence to COVID-19 prevention measures: survey findings among young people in Luxembourg Reassessing social trust: gossip, self-policing, and Covid-19 risk communication in Norway Organisational learning, or organised irresponsibility? Risk, opacity and lesson learning about mental health related deaths The “risk object” of cannabis edibles: perspectives from young adults in Canada
×
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