Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Jan 23;8(1):e017717.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017717.

Effect of interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information on intentions and behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Juliet A Usher-Smith  1 , Barbora Silarova  2 , Stephen J Sharp  2 , Katie Mills  1 , Simon J Griffin  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effect of interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information on intentions and behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Juliet A Usher-Smith et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objective: To provide a comprehensive review of the impact on intention to change health-related behaviours and health-related behaviours themselves, including screening uptake, of interventions incorporating information about cancer risk targeted at the general adult population.

Design: A systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis.

Data sources: An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO from 1 January 2000 to 1 July 2017.

Inclusion criteria: Randomised controlled trials of interventions including provision of a personal estimate of future cancer risk based on two or more non-genetic variables to adults recruited from the general population that include at least one behavioural outcome.

Results: We included 19 studies reporting 12 outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes between studies. There is evidence that interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information do not affect intention to attend or attendance at screening (relative risk 1.00 (0.97-1.03)). There is limited evidence that they increase smoking abstinence, sun protection, adult skin self-examination and breast examination, and decrease intention to tan. However, they do not increase smoking cessation, parental child skin examination or intention to protect skin. No studies assessed changes in diet, alcohol consumption or physical activity.

Conclusions: Interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information do not affect uptake of screening, but there is limited evidence of effect on some health-related behaviours. Further research, ideally including objective measures of behaviour, is needed before cancer risk information is incorporated into routine practice for health promotion in the general population.

Keywords: oncology; preventive medicine; public health.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. RCT, randomised controlled trial.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Relative risk for adherence to recommended screening postintervention. AR, absolute risk; CR, comparative risk; CRC, colorectal cancer; FOBT, faecal occult blood test.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. National Cancer Institute. The nation’s investment in cancer research. A plan and budget proposal for the fiscal year 2006, 2006.
    1. McCaul KD, O’Donnell SM. Naive beliefs about breast cancer risk. Womens Heal 1998;4:93–101. - PubMed
    1. Emery J, Morris H, Goodchild R, et al. . The GRAIDS Trial: a cluster randomised controlled trial of computer decision support for the management of familial cancer risk in primary care. Br J Cancer 2007;97:486–93. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603897 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Weinstein ND, Atwood K, Puleo E, et al. . Colon cancer: risk perceptions and risk communication. J Health Commun 2004;9:53–65. 10.1080/10810730490271647 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Waters EA, Klein WM, Moser RP, et al. . Correlates of unrealistic risk beliefs in a nationally representative sample. J Behav Med 2011;34:225–35. 10.1007/s10865-010-9303-7 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources