Autonomous and informed decision-making: The case of colorectal cancer screening.

PLoS One

Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Published: August 2020

Introduction: It is increasingly considered important that people make an autonomous and informed decision concerning colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, the realisation of autonomy within the concept of informed decision-making might be interpreted too narrowly. Additionally, relatively little is known about what the eligible population believes to be a 'good' screening decision. Therefore, we aimed to explore how the concepts of autonomous and informed decision-making relate to how the eligible CRC screening population makes their decision and when they believe to have made a 'good' screening decision.

Methods: We conducted 27 semi-structured interviews with the eligible CRC screening population (eighteen CRC screening participants and nine non-participants). The general topics discussed concerned how people made their CRC screening decision, how they experienced making this decision and when they considered they had made a 'good' decision.

Results: Most interviewees viewed a 'good' CRC screening decision as one based on both reasoning and feeling/intuition, and that is made freely. However, many CRC screening non-participants experienced a certain social pressure to participate. All CRC screening non-participants viewed making an informed decision as essential. This appeared to be the case to a lesser extent for CRC screening participants. For most, experiences and values were involved in their decision-making.

Conclusion: Our sample of the eligible CRC screening population viewed aspects related to the concepts of autonomous and informed decision-making as important for making a 'good' CRC screening decision. However, in particular the existence of a social norm may be affecting a true autonomous decision-making process. Additionally, the present concept of informed decision-making with its strong emphasis on making a fully informed and well-considered decision does not appear to be entirely reflective of the process in practice. More efforts could be made to attune to the diverse values and factors that are involved in deciding about CRC screening participation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7259584PMC
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233308PLOS

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

crc screening
48
informed decision-making
20
autonomous informed
16
screening decision
16
screening
15
crc
12
eligible crc
12
screening population
12
decision
9
colorectal cancer
8

Similar Publications

Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer mortality in the USA and is highly preventable, with early screening vital for improving outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate adherence rates of multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) testing, following updated guidelines recommending screening starting at age 45.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study used aggregated data from Exact Sciences Laboratories LLC, examining new users (first-time testers) aged 45-85 with commercial, Medicare, or Medicaid insurance who received mt-sDNA test kits (point-of-care) between January 1, 2023, and June 1, 2023.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Anti-colorectal cancer actions of Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch. and its underlying mechanism via HPLC integration and network pharmacological approaches.

Phytomedicine

January 2025

College of Pharmacy, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, 830000, China; School of Biological and Food Engineering, Engineering Research Center for Development and High Value Utilization of Genuine Medicinal Materials in North Anhui Province, Suzhou University, Suzhou, Anhui, 234000, China; Department of Analytical Chemistry and Food Science, Faculty of Food Science and Technology, University of Vigo-Ourense Campus, Ourense E-32004, Spain. Electronic address:

Background: The therapeutic and prognostic outcomes for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain unsatisfactory. Among multiple reported bioactive functionalities of Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch. one vital recently reported activity is its therapeutic role against numerous cancers but limited information is available related to its underlying key mechanisms and therapeutically active ingredients, especially against CRC treatment.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

While biomarkers have been shown to enhance the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) compared to conventional treatments, there is a pressing need to discover novel biomarkers that can assist in assessing the prognostic impact of immunotherapy and in formulating individualized treatment plans. The RUNX family, consisting of RUNX1, RUNX2, and RUNX3, has been recognized as crucial regulators in developmental processes, with dysregulation of these genes also being implicated in tumorigenesis and cancer progression. In our present study, we demonstrated a crucial regulatory role of RUNX in CD8T and CD103CD8T cell-mediated anti-tumor response within the tumor microenvironment (TME) of human CRC.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: The pathogenesis of colorectal cancer (CRC) is influenced by various risk factors, and genetic alterations in progression of colon polyps. The expression patterns of microRNA-548 (miR-548) in colorectal tissues have been sufficiently characterized. The aim of this study is to clarify the role of miR-548aa in tumorigenesis, gene targeting, predictive value and its expression levels in tumoral versus adjacent marginal tissues in CRC patients.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Gender and sex differences in colorectal cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment.

Clin Transl Oncol

January 2025

Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of Navarra, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Navarra, IdISNA, Navarra, Spain.

Males have a higher incidence and mortality rate from colorectal cancer (CRC) compared with females. This review examines the reasons for these differences, including risk factors, screening participation, interpretation of screening tests, presentation and tumour types, pathophysiology (particularly the impact of sex hormones on tumour-related gene expression, microsatellite instability, micro-RNA expression, and the tumour microenvironment), and the efficacy and toxicity of treatment. Sex differences in hormones and body composition are responsible for some of the sexual dimorphism in CRC incidence and outcomes, particularly the pathophysiology, CRC presentation, the pharmacokinetics of cytotoxic therapies, and the impact of treatment on outcomes.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!