Mammography Screening Preferences Among Screening-Eligible Women in Their 40s : A National U.S. Survey.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently changed its recommendation for mammography screening from informed decision making to biennial screening for women aged 40 to 49 years. Although many women welcome this change, some may prefer not to be screened at age 40 years. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a national probability-based U.S. survey to investigate breast cancer screening preferences among women aged 39 to 49 years. DESIGN: Pre-post survey with a breast cancer screening decision aid (DA) intervention. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05376241). SETTING: Online national U.S. survey. PARTICIPANTS: 495 women aged 39 to 49 years without a history of breast cancer or a known BRCA1/2 gene mutation. INTERVENTION: A mammography screening DA providing information about screening benefits and harms and a personalized breast cancer risk estimate. MEASUREMENTS: Screening preferences (assessed before and after the DA), 10-year Gail model risk estimate, and whether the information was surprising and different from past messages. RESULTS: Before viewing the DA, 27.0% of participants preferred to delay screening (vs. having mammography at their current age), compared with 38.5% after the DA. There was no increase in the number never wanting mammography (5.4% before the DA vs. 4.3% after the DA). Participants who preferred to delay screening had lower breast cancer risk than those who preferred not to delay. The information about overdiagnosis was surprising for 37.4% of participants versus 27.2% and 22.9% for information about false-positive results and screening benefits, respectively. LIMITATION: Respondent preferences may have been influenced by the then-current USPSTF guideline. CONCLUSION: There are women in their 40s who would prefer to have mammography at an older age, especially after being informed of the benefits and harms of screening. Women who wanted to delay screening were at lower breast cancer risk than women who wanted screening at their current age. Many found information about the benefits and harms of mammography surprising. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

Detecting and monitoring concerns against HPV vaccination on social media using large language models.

Health risks due to preventable infections such as human papillomavirus (HPV) are exacerbated by persistent vaccine hesitancy. Due to limited sample sizes and the time needed to roll out, traditional methodologies like surveys and interviews offer restricted insights into quickly evolving vaccine concerns. Social media platforms can serve as fertile ground for monitoring vaccine-related conversations and detecting emerging concerns in a scalable and dynamic manner. Using state-of-the-art large language models, we propose a minimally supervised end-to-end approach to identify concerns against HPV vaccination from social media posts. We detect and characterize the concerns against HPV vaccination pre- and post-2020 to understand the evolution of HPV vaccine discourse. Upon analyzing 653 k HPV-related post-2020 tweets, adverse effects, personal anecdotes, and vaccine mandates emerged as the dominant themes. Compared to pre-2020, there is a shift towards personal anecdotes of vaccine injury with a growing call for parental consent and transparency. The proposed approach provides an end-to-end system, i.e. given a collection of tweets, a list of prevalent concerns is returned, providing critical insights for crafting targeted interventions, debunking messages, and informing public health campaigns.

Achieving Public Health Impact: Health Communication Research to Inform Tobacco Regulatory Science.

Health communication research applies communication science to develop generalizable knowledge capable of improving the health and well-being of individuals and communities. But to what extent does the knowledge generated by the health communication field actually achieve public health impact? To answer this question, we discuss the application of health communication science and research within a tobacco regulatory science framework. We describe three areas in which health communication research funded by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) contributed to 1) youth tobacco prevention campaigns, 2) cigarette health warnings, and 3) regulation of labeling, advertising, and marketing claims. These examples demonstrate how communication regulatory science achieves public health impact in the real world by informing national policies, regulatory actions, and public health practice.

Delivering Effective Messages in the Patient-Clinician Encounter.

This JAMA Insights discusses the importance of effective patient-clinician communication and provides strategies for clinicians that can enhance accurate information gathering and exchange, encourage patient engagement, enhance comprehension, and ensure retention of the information.

Beliefs as causal mediators in the design of communication interventions: exploring semantic and affective priming in parallel encouragement designs.

The design of communication campaigns to alter health behaviors often begins with the identification of behavioral beliefs assumed to be causal antecedents of behavioral intentions. The assumption beliefs are causal derives from various theories of belief and intention/behavior and from statistical patterns of correlation. In cases of high-risk/cost campaigns, presuming causal order should require additional evidence. One approach is the parallel encouragement design which involves "randomly encouraging" levels of the mediator to establish its causal linkage to the outcome. This study proposes and tests a novel method of randomly encouraging beliefs as the mediator of messages on intention. Results show that semantic priming altered misbeliefs about Natural American Spirit cigarettes which in turn influenced intentions, suggesting its utility as an encouragement method to establish causal mediation of beliefs in message effects models. Results for countercampaign messages and broader theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Effect of nicotine corrective messaging on nicotine-related beliefs in US adults: a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Widespread misperceptions of the health risks of nicotine could undermine the public health benefits of the Food and Drug Administration's actions, including modified risk tobacco product authorisations and a reduced nicotine product standard for cigarettes. METHODS: 794 US adults (aged 18+) in NORC's AmeriSpeak panel participated in a randomised controlled trial in Spring 2021 to test the effect of three exposures to eight nicotine corrective messages (NCM) on beliefs about nicotine, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), e-cigarettes and reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes at 3-month follow-up. Analyses conducted in 2022 examined the effect of study condition (NCM (n=393) vs no message control (n=401)) on nicotine beliefs, use intentions and use of nicotine and tobacco products. RESULTS: Exposure to three NCM doses reduced nicotine (b=-0.33; 95% CI -0.60, -0.07), NRT (b=-0.49; 95% CI -0.85, -0.14), e-cigarette (b=-0.32; 95% CI -0.59, -0.05) and RNC cigarette false beliefs (b=-0.64; 95% CI -1.26, -0.02) compared with the control, controlling for baseline beliefs. Baseline tobacco use and concern about nicotine addiction attenuated intervention effects on false beliefs about RNC cigarettes. There were few intervention effects on intention or use of nicotine and tobacco products. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated exposure to NCM was necessary to reduce false beliefs about nicotine and tobacco products. Future studies will improve understanding of the dose and duration of nicotine education needed to shift intentions and behaviour, as well as tailored content for tobacco product users to achieve similar reductions in false beliefs as non-users. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04805515.

Assessing and Understanding Reactance, Self-Exemption, Disbelief, Source Derogation and Information Conflict in Reaction to Overdiagnosis in Mammography Screening: Scale Development and Preliminary Validation.

PURPOSE: Overdiagnosis is a concept central to making informed breast cancer screening decisions, and yet some people may react to overdiagnosis with doubt and skepticism. The present research assessed 4 related reactions to overdiagnosis: reactance, self-exemption, disbelief, and source derogation (REDS). The degree to which the concept of overdiagnosis conflicts with participants' prior beliefs and health messages (information conflict) was also assessed as a potential antecedent of REDS. We developed a scale to assess these reactions, evaluated how those reactions are related, and identified their potential implications for screening decision making. METHODS: Female participants aged 39 to 49 years read information about overdiagnosis in mammography screening and completed survey questions assessing their reactions to that information. We used a multidimensional theoretical framework to assess dimensionality and overall domain-specific internal consistency of the REDS and Information Conflict questions. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed using data randomly split into a training set and test set. Correlations between REDS, screening intentions, and other outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Five-hundred twenty-five participants completed an online survey. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses identified that Reactance, Self Exemption, Disbelief, Source Derogation, and Information Conflict represent unique constructs. A reduced 20-item scale was created by selecting 4 items per construct, which showed good model fit. Reactance, Disbelief, and Source Derogation were associated with lower intent to use information about overdiagnosis in decision making and the belief that informing people about overdiagnosis is unimportant. CONCLUSIONS: REDS and Information Conflict are distinct but correlated constructs that are common reactions to overdiagnosis. Some of these reactions may have negative implications for making informed screening decisions. HIGHLIGHTS: Overdiagnosis is a concept central to making informed breast cancer screening decisions, and yet when provided information about overdiagnosis, some people are skeptical.This research developed a measure that assessed different ways in which people might express skepticism about overdiagnosis (reactance, self-exemption, disbelief, source derogation) and also the perception that overdiagnosis conflicts with prior knowledge and health messages (information conflict).These different reactions are distinct but correlated and are common reactions when people learn about overdiagnosis.Reactance, disbelief, and source derogation are associated with lower intent to use information about overdiagnosis in decision making as well as the belief that informing people about overdiagnosis is unimportant.

The Effect of Repetition on the Perceived Truth of Tobacco-Related Health Misinformation Among U.S. Adults.

As concerns about the effects of health misinformation rise, understanding why misbeliefs are accepted is increasingly important. People believe repeated statements more than novel statements, an effect known as truth by repetition, however this has not been examined in the context of tobacco information. Misbeliefs about tobacco are rampant and novel facts about tobacco are viewed as less believable. This paper examines how repetition of true and false tobacco statements affects truth perceptions. We recruited an online sample of 1,436 U.S. adults in May 2021. In an exposure phase, each participant rated their interest in 30 randomly selected statements about tobacco products and general knowledge trivia, half of them true and half false. The study had a two (tobacco product) by two (familiarity of statement claim) between-subjects design and a two (statement truth) by two (statement repetition) within-subjects design. During the testing phase participants rated the truthfulness of 24 repeated statements and 24 unseen statements. Repetition of true and false tobacco statements increased their subjective truth (diff=.20, p < .001), and the effect was larger for false claims compared to true claims. This underscores the importance of strategies to inoculate people against misinformation and calls for interventions that can stop the repetition of newly generated false claims.

IQOS print magazine advertising characteristics and reach before and after FDA authorisation as a modified risk tobacco product.

INTRODUCTION: IQOS is a heated tobacco product that was authorised as a modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) in July 2020. While it was removed from the US market in 2021 for legal reasons, as the first tobacco product to receive an 'exposure modification' MRTP order, surveillance of IQOS marketing is needed to inform regulation and policy for future MRTPs. The purpose of this study is to expand the current research on IQOS advertising in the USA by examining content and readership characteristics of IQOS ads in print magazines before and after US Food and Drug Administration MRTP authorisation. METHODS: We merged content analysis data with Kantar Media data on magazine placement and expenditures. Magazine readership data were obtained from MRI-Simmons. We compared data from pre-MRTP authorisation with data post-MRTP authorisation. This study was conducted in 2021. RESULTS: There was one unique ad and there were 13 observations pre-MRTP, and eight unique ads and 132 observations post-MRTP. Compared with pre-MRTP ads, more post-MRTP ads featured Marlboro HeatSticks, including Amber HeatSticks, and featured people. All ads contained a warning label-most warning labels were cigarette specific. IQOS ads were featured in magazines that are especially popular among women. CONCLUSIONS: After receiving MRTP authorisation, IQOS increased ad expenditures in print magazines with a readership comprised of primarily women. If IQOS returns to the US market, it will be important for tobacco control to monitor their advertisement content, placement, and expenditures.

Effects of advertising features on smokers' and non-smokers' perceptions of a reduced nicotine cigarette modified risk tobacco product.

INTRODUCTION: Research is needed to determine the impact of marketing on perceptions and use of reduced nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes, particularly as US regulators have permitted the sale of an RNC cigarette modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) that seeks further authorisation to advertise using modified risk claims. This study examined the effects of two advertising elements (product name and disclaimer content) on perceptions of an RNC cigarette MRTP. METHODS: Adult participants (n=807, 28.7% smokers, 58.2% male, 74.2% non-Latinx white) completed an online MTurk survey. Participants were randomised to view one of six RNC cigarette advertisements, using a 2×3 between-subject factorial design to manipulate product name ('Moonlight' vs 'Moonrise') and disclaimer content (industry-proposed: 'Nicotine is addictive. Less nicotine does NOT mean a safer cigarette' vs focused: 'Less nicotine does NOT mean a safer cigarette' vs no content), then completed recall and product perception questionnaires. RESULTS: All participants who viewed the industry-proposed disclaimer (vs no content) perceived greater addiction risk (p's<0.05). Non-smokers who viewed this disclaimer also perceived greater health risks and held fewer false beliefs (p's<0.05). Smokers who viewed Moonlight (vs Moonrise) ads perceived lower health risks (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Disclaimer content may effectively inform consumers about addiction risk of a new RNC cigarette MRTP, and further inform non-smokers about health risks. This element, however, had little effect on perceived health risks among smokers, among whom the Moonlight product name was associated with health risk misperceptions similar to the banned 'light' descriptor.

Impact of Privacy Messaging on COVID-19 Exposure Notification App Downloads: Evidence From a Randomized Experiment.

Introduction: Digital contact-tracing smartphone apps have the potential to slow the spread of disease but are not widely used. We tested whether messages describing how a COVID-19 digital contact-tracing app protects users' privacy led to increased or decreased intentions to download the app by either calming privacy concerns or increasing their saliency. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting/participants: We recruited adult smartphone owners in the U.S. (oversampled for younger adults aged 18-34 years) in November 2020 through an online panel. Intervention: Survey software randomly assigned 860 participants to 1 of 2 parallel messaging conditions (n=430 privacy assured, n=430 no privacy described). Main outcome measures: 4-point scale of intention to use the app "if public health officials released a COVID Exposure Notification app in their state" that averaged likelihood to (1) download and install the app on their phone; (2) keep the app active on their phone; and (3) keep Bluetooth active on their phone (needed for the app to work). Results: After removing incompletes, those who failed the manipulation checks, or those who had already downloaded a COVID-19 digital contact-tracing app, we analyzed 671 participants (n=330 privacy, n=341 no privacy) in 2021. There was no relationship between privacy condition and download intention (meanprivacy=2.69, meannoprivacy=2.69, b=0.01, 95% CI= -0.13, 0.15, p=0.922) but also no evidence that describing the app's security increased context-dependent privacy concerns (measured 3 ways). Instead, we found increased endorsement of data security in the privacy condition using a scale of beliefs about the app keeping privacy secure (meanprivacy=2.74, meannoprivacy=2.58, b=0.16, 95% CI=0.04, 0.28, p=0.009, small effect ω2=0.009). Conclusions: This study provides some evidence that people developing contact-tracing messaging campaigns do not need to worry that describing a digital contact-tracing app's privacy protections will backfire. Future mixed methods testing of messages about who has access to information-and for how long-may uncover new communication strategies to increase public trust in contact-tracing apps. Trial registration: This study is registered with AsPredicted#51826.

Exploring content of misinformation about HPV vaccine on twitter.

Although social media can be a source of guidance about HPV vaccination for parents, the information may not always be complete or accurate. We conducted a retrospective content analysis to identify content and frequencies of occurrence of disinformation and misinformation about HPV vaccine posted on Twitter between December 15, 2019, through March 31, 2020, among 3876 unique, English language #HPV Tweets, excluding retweets. We found that 24% of Tweets contained disinformation or misinformation, and the remaining 76% contained support/education. The most prevalent categories of disinformation/misinformation were (1) adverse health effects (59%), (2) mandatory vaccination (19%), and (3) inefficacy of the vaccine (14%). Among the adverse health effects Tweets, non-specific harm/injury (51%) and death (23%) were most frequent. Disinformation/misinformation Tweets vs. supportive Tweets had 5.44 (95% CI 5.33-5.56) times the incidence rate of retweet. In conclusion, almost one-quarter of #HPV Tweets contained disinformation or misinformation about the HPV vaccine and these tweets received higher audience engagement including likes and retweets. Implications for vaccine hesitancy are discussed.

Design of a randomized controlled trial of digital health and community health worker support for diabetes management among low-income patients.

BACKGROUND: Insulin-dependent diabetes is a challenging disease to manage and involves complex behaviors, such as self-monitoring of blood glucose. This can be especially challenging in the face of socioeconomic barriers and in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital health self-monitoring interventions and community health worker support are promising and complementary best practices for improving diabetes-related health behaviors and outcomes. Yet, these strategies have not been tested in combination. This protocol paper describes the rationale and design of a trial that measures the combined effect of digital health and community health worker support on glucose self-monitoring and glycosylated hemoglobin. METHODS: The study population was uninsured or publicly insured; lived in high-poverty, urban neighborhoods; and had poorly controlled diabetes mellitus with insulin dependence. The study consisted of three arms: usual diabetes care; digital health self-monitoring; or combined digital health and community health worker support. The primary outcome was adherence to blood glucose self-monitoring. The exploratory outcome was change in glycosylated hemoglobin. CONCLUSION: The design of this trial was grounded in social justice and community engagement. The study protocols were designed in collaboration with frontline community health workers, the study aim was explicit about furthering knowledge useful for advancing health equity, and the population was focused on low-income people. This trial will advance knowledge of whether combining digital health and community health worker interventions can improve glucose self-monitoring and diabetes-related outcomes in a high-risk population.

Influence of online comments on smokers' E-cigarette attitude: Opinion climate, review fraud, and resistance to persuasion.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effect of online comments on smokers' attitude toward trying e-cigarettes. It also explored the effect of an unobtrusive forewarning in increasing smokers' resistance to online review fraud. DESIGN: 739 adult smokers participated in an experiment with a 2 comment valence (supportive vs. oppositional) x 3 comment deception warning (no warning vs. early warning vs. late warning) + 1 control (no comment) factorial design. Smokers watched two e-cigarette commercials. The control group received only the ads. The treatment groups saw 10 to 12 comments following each ad.Main Outcome Measure: E-cigarette attitude. RESULTS: Smokers who read supportive (M = 5.28, SD = 1.37), oppositional (M = 4.96, SD = 1.53), and no comment (M = 5.44, SD = 1.20) showed significant difference on their e-cigarettes attitude, p = .004. When the comment climate was overly in favor of e-cigarettes, warning smokers of review fraud could raise their awareness of comment deception, increase defensive processing, decrease their social identification with commenters, and eventually lower their interest in trying e-cigarettes. CONCLUSION: The overall opinion climate in the form of aggregated valence of comments could sway smokers' e-cigarette attitude. Smokers could benefit from warnings of online review fraud.

The Role of Information Avoidance in Managing Uncertainty from Conflicting Recommendations about Electronic Cigarettes.

Insufficient scientific evidence about electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has led to conflicting recommendations (CRs) by credible scientific organizations, creating a public health debate that could prove especially difficult to reconcile as current and former smokers make decisions about whether to use e-cigarettes. To investigate how CRs about e-cigarettes may affect intentions to engage in healthy behaviors, 717 former and current smokers were randomly exposed to one of five conditions (varying in the level of conflict in recommendations) in this between-subject experiment. Our results indicated a significant interaction between the message level of conflict and individuals' information avoidance, employed to maintain hope and deniability. These results suggest the effects of CRs stemming from scientific uncertainty vary with subgroups of people, pointing to several pressing theoretical and practical implications.

Qué camino tomar: la información errónea sobre la salud en las redes sociales

Se ha demostrado que las falsedades se propagan más rápido y llegan más lejos que la información correcta, y las investigaciones indican que la información errónea puede tener efectos negativos en el mundo real, como amplificar la controversia sobre las vacunas y diseminar la recomendación de tratamientos oncológicos no comprobados. Por consiguiente, la información errónea sobre la salud en las redes sociales requiere con urgencia una mayor acción de quienes trabajan en la investigación y la práctica de la salud pública. Aquí definimos la “información errónea sobre la salud” como cualquier afirmación relacionada con la salud de un hecho que es falso sobre la base del consenso científico actual. Muchos otros tipos de información plantean un desafío para la comunicación de salud, incluidos los hallazgos contradictorios u opuestos, la evidencia cambiante y la información que suscita un alto grado de incertidumbre; sin embargo, estas cuestiones están fuera del ámbito de este artículo editorial, que se centra en información que es ostensiblemente falsa.

How did beliefs and perceptions about e-cigarettes change after national news coverage of the EVALI outbreak?

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to media content can shape public opinions about tobacco. In early September 2019, the outbreak of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) became headline news in the United States. METHODS: In August and September 2019, we conducted two cross-sectional online surveys with current and former smokers assessing attitudes and beliefs about e-cigarettes. Study one (n = 865) was collected before the EVALI outbreak was widely covered and study two (n = 344) was collected after the outbreak had become nation-wide news. We examined differences in perceptions and beliefs between time points. RESULTS: E-cigarette harm perceptions increased between study one (mean = 2.67) and study two (mean = 2.90, p < .05). Ever-users of e-cigarettes largely account for this change. Endorsement of the belief that e-cigarettes were risky and more likely to cause lung damage compared to cigarettes increased between studies (p < .05). Seventy eight percent of participants at study two were aware of the vaping illness story. Being aware of the story was associated with more endorsement of the belief that e-cigarettes were risky to use, but not that using e-cigarettes would make the participant more likely to get damaged lungs. DISCUSSION: When the stories about the health and safety of tobacco products dominate the public information environment, it presents an opportunity to change beliefs that are frequently targeted by paid health campaigns. Changes in participant's perceptions of e-cigarettes were associated with coverage of this large news story, underscoring the importance of working to ensure that coverage is a scientifically accurate as possible.

Harm Perceptions and Beliefs about Potential Modified Risk Tobacco Products.

Under US law, tobacco products may be authorized to claim lower exposure to chemicals, or lower risk of health harms. We sought to examine the harm perceptions and beliefs about potential modified risk tobacco products (MRTPs). We recruited 864 adult current and former smokers in August 2019. Participants read a paragraph describing the potential for the FDA to authorize MRTPs and a brief description of MRTPs. The most endorsed beliefs for each product were that they contained nicotine and that they were risky. Believing that e-cigarettes can help smokers quit smoking, that they tasted good, and looked cool were associated with greater odds of intending to try e-cigarettes after controlling for demographic and use factors. For snus, the beliefs that the product was not addictive and tasted good were associated with increased odds of intending to try snus. The beliefs that heated tobacco would taste good and would be a good quit aid was associated with increased odds of intentions to try heated tobacco products. Understanding what the public believes about products currently or potentially authorized to be marketed as modified risk tobacco products can inform communication efforts.