Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Urology 1/2020

01-12-2020 | Ultrasound | Research article

Public attitudes towards screening for kidney cancer: an online survey

Authors: Laragh L. W. Harvey-Kelly, Hannah Harrison, Sabrina H. Rossi, Simon J. Griffin, Grant D. Stewart, Juliet A. Usher-Smith

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Kidney cancer is often asymptomatic, leading to proposals for a screening programme. The views of the public towards introducing a new screening programme for kidney cancer are unknown. The aim of this study was to explore attitudes towards kidney cancer screening and factors influencing intention to attend a future screening programme.

Methods

We conducted an online population-based survey of 1021 adults aged 45–77 years. The main outcome measure was intention to attend four possible screening tests (urine, blood, ultrasound scan, low-dose CT) as well as extended low-dose CT scans within lung cancer screening programmes. We used multivariable regression to examine the association between intention and each screening test.

Results

Most participants stated that they would be ‘very likely’ or ‘likely’ to undergo each of the screening tests [urine test: n = 961 (94.1%); blood test: n = 922 (90.3%); ultrasound: n = 914 (89.5%); low-dose CT: n = 804 (78.8%); lung CT: n = 962 (95.2%)]. Greater intention to attend was associated with higher general cancer worry and less perceived burden/inconvenience about the screening tests. Less worry about the screening test was also associated with higher intention to attend, but only in those with low general cancer worry (cancer worry scale ≤ 5). Compared with intention to take up screening with a urine test, participants were half as likely to report that they intended to undergo blood [OR 0.56 (0.43–0.73)] or ultrasound [OR 0.50 (0.38–0.67)] testing, and half as likely again to report that they intended to take part in a screening programme featuring a low dose CT scan for kidney cancer screening alone [OR 0.19 (0.14–0.27)].

Conclusion

Participants in this study expressed high levels of intention to accept an invitation to screening for kidney cancer, both within a kidney cancer specific screening programme and in conjunction with lung cancer screening. The choice of screening test is likely to influence uptake. Together these findings support on-going research into kidney cancer screening tests and the potential for combining kidney cancer screening with existing or new screening programmes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Rossi SH, Blick C, Handforth C, Brown JE, Stewart GD. Essential research priorities in renal cancer: a modified delphi consensus statement. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;6:991–8. CrossRefPubMed Rossi SH, Blick C, Handforth C, Brown JE, Stewart GD. Essential research priorities in renal cancer: a modified delphi consensus statement. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;6:991–8. CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Rossi SH, Fielding A, Blick C, Handforth C, Brown JE, Stewart GD. Setting research priorities in partnership with patients to provide patient-centred urological cancer care. Eur Urol. 2019;75:891–3. CrossRefPubMed Rossi SH, Fielding A, Blick C, Handforth C, Brown JE, Stewart GD. Setting research priorities in partnership with patients to provide patient-centred urological cancer care. Eur Urol. 2019;75:891–3. CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Morrissey JJ, Mellnick VM, Luo J, Siegel MJ, Figenshau RS, Bhayani S, et al. Evaluation of urine aquaporin-1 and perilipin-2 concentrations as biomarkers to screen for renal cell carcinoma. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:204. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Morrissey JJ, Mellnick VM, Luo J, Siegel MJ, Figenshau RS, Bhayani S, et al. Evaluation of urine aquaporin-1 and perilipin-2 concentrations as biomarkers to screen for renal cell carcinoma. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:204. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Scelo G, Muller DC, Riboli E, Johannson M, Cross AJ, Vineis P, et al. KIM-1 as a blood-based marker for early detection of kidney cancer: a prospective nested case-control study. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(22):5594–601. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Scelo G, Muller DC, Riboli E, Johannson M, Cross AJ, Vineis P, et al. KIM-1 as a blood-based marker for early detection of kidney cancer: a prospective nested case-control study. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(22):5594–601. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Mühlbacher AC, Juhnke C. Patient preferences versus physicians’ judgement: does it make a difference in healthcare decision making? Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013;11:163–80. CrossRefPubMed Mühlbacher AC, Juhnke C. Patient preferences versus physicians’ judgement: does it make a difference in healthcare decision making? Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013;11:163–80. CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6:1–6. CrossRef Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6:1–6. CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Peer E, Vosgerau J, Acquisti A. Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Behav Res Methods. 2014;46:1023–31. CrossRefPubMed Peer E, Vosgerau J, Acquisti A. Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Behav Res Methods. 2014;46:1023–31. CrossRefPubMed
13.
15.
go back to reference Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, Jepson C, Brody D, Boyce A. Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening. Health Psychol. 1991;10:259–67. CrossRefPubMed Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, Jepson C, Brody D, Boyce A. Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening. Health Psychol. 1991;10:259–67. CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Simon AE, Forbes LJL, Boniface D, Warburton F, Brain KE, Dessaix A, et al. An international measure of awareness and beliefs about cancer: development and testing of the ABC. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e001758. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Simon AE, Forbes LJL, Boniface D, Warburton F, Brain KE, Dessaix A, et al. An international measure of awareness and beliefs about cancer: development and testing of the ABC. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e001758. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Ali N, Lifford KJ, Carter B, McRonald F, Yadegarfar G, Baldwin DR, et al. Barriers to uptake among high-risk individuals declining participation in lung cancer screening: a mixed methods analysis of the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e008254. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ali N, Lifford KJ, Carter B, McRonald F, Yadegarfar G, Baldwin DR, et al. Barriers to uptake among high-risk individuals declining participation in lung cancer screening: a mixed methods analysis of the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e008254. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Oppenheimer DM, Meyvis T, Davidenko N. Instructional manipulation checks: detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2009;45:867–72. CrossRef Oppenheimer DM, Meyvis T, Davidenko N. Instructional manipulation checks: detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2009;45:867–72. CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Waller J, Osborne K, Wardle J. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in Great Britain: a general population survey. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:562–6. CrossRefPubMed Waller J, Osborne K, Wardle J. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in Great Britain: a general population survey. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:562–6. CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Phillips KA, Marshall JK, Thabane L, Kulin NA. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Value Health. 2007;10:415–30. CrossRefPubMed Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Phillips KA, Marshall JK, Thabane L, Kulin NA. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Value Health. 2007;10:415–30. CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Hawley ST, Volk RJ, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon SW, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46(9 Suppl 1):S10-6. CrossRefPubMed Hawley ST, Volk RJ, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon SW, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46(9 Suppl 1):S10-6. CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Mansfield C, Tangka FK, Ekwueme DU, Smith JL, Guy GPJ, Li C, et al. Stated preference for cancer screening: a systematic review of the literature, 1990–2013. Prev Chronic Dis. 1990;13:150433. CrossRef Mansfield C, Tangka FK, Ekwueme DU, Smith JL, Guy GPJ, Li C, et al. Stated preference for cancer screening: a systematic review of the literature, 1990–2013. Prev Chronic Dis. 1990;13:150433. CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Bobridge A, Price K, Gill TK, Taylor AW. Influencing cancer screening participation rates—providing a combined cancer screening program (a ‘one stop’ shop) could be a potential answer. Front Oncol. 2017;7:308. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bobridge A, Price K, Gill TK, Taylor AW. Influencing cancer screening participation rates—providing a combined cancer screening program (a ‘one stop’ shop) could be a potential answer. Front Oncol. 2017;7:308. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
go back to reference Ricardo-Rodrigues I, Jiménez-García R, Hernández-Barrera V, Carrasco-Garrido P, Jiménez-Trujillo I, López de Andrés A. Social disparities in access to breast and cervical cancer screening by women living in Spain. Public Health. 2015;129:881–8. CrossRefPubMed Ricardo-Rodrigues I, Jiménez-García R, Hernández-Barrera V, Carrasco-Garrido P, Jiménez-Trujillo I, López de Andrés A. Social disparities in access to breast and cervical cancer screening by women living in Spain. Public Health. 2015;129:881–8. CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Palan S, Schitter C. Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments. J Behav Exp Finance. 2018;17:22–7. CrossRef Palan S, Schitter C. Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments. J Behav Exp Finance. 2018;17:22–7. CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Cooke R, French DP. How well do the theory of reasoned action and theory of planned behaviour predict intentions and attendance at screening programmes? A meta-analysis. Psychol Health. 2008;23:745–65. CrossRefPubMed Cooke R, French DP. How well do the theory of reasoned action and theory of planned behaviour predict intentions and attendance at screening programmes? A meta-analysis. Psychol Health. 2008;23:745–65. CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Vrinten C, Waller J, Von Wagner C, Wardle J. Cancer Fear: Facilitator and Deterrent to Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015;24:400–5. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vrinten C, Waller J, Von Wagner C, Wardle J. Cancer Fear: Facilitator and Deterrent to Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015;24:400–5. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
go back to reference Sheeran P. Intention—behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review. Eur Rev Soc Psychol. 2002;12:1–36. CrossRef Sheeran P. Intention—behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review. Eur Rev Soc Psychol. 2002;12:1–36. CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Public attitudes towards screening for kidney cancer: an online survey
Authors
Laragh L. W. Harvey-Kelly
Hannah Harrison
Sabrina H. Rossi
Simon J. Griffin
Grant D. Stewart
Juliet A. Usher-Smith
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Urology / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00724-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Urology 1/2020 Go to the issue