Extended parallel process model (EPPM) in evaluating lung Cancer risk perception among older smokers.
Conceptual model
High readiness
Lung cancer
Older smoker
Risk perception
Smoking
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 10 2021
17 10 2021
Historique:
received:
05
01
2021
accepted:
27
09
2021
entrez:
18
10
2021
pubmed:
19
10
2021
medline:
3
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is a lack of scientific literature on the application of fear appeals theories to evaluate lung cancer risk perception among smokers. The aim of the present study is to apply the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) to discover the perception of the smokers about their lifetime risk of developing lung cancer (perceived susceptibility), their perception of lung cancer survival (perceived severity), response efficacy, self-efficacy, and readiness to quit. In this cross-sectional study, 215 eligible smokers (aged 45 years and over who have smoked at least 1 pack per day in the last 5 years) were recruited. The data collection tool was designed using validate self-report questionnaires and it was contained items on the perceived risk of a smoker contracting lung cancer and perceived lung cancer survival rate. It also had questions to measure the main constructs of the EPPM and Readiness to quit ("Low_Readiness", and "High_Readiness"). To test how the data support conceptual EPPM to data, Generalized Structural Equation Modeling (GSEM) was used. Findings showed a significant relationship between Perceived_Susceptibility and Perceived_Response Efficacy; (B = 1.16, P < 0.001); between Perceived_Susceptibility and Perceived_Self Efficacy, (B = -0.93, P < 0.001), Perceived_Severity, and Perceived_Response Efficacy (B = 1.07, P < 0.001). There was also a significant relationship between Perceived_Threat and Perceived_Response Efficacy; between Perceived_Threat and Perceived_Self Efficacy. The relationship between High_Readiness and Perceived_Self Efficacy, and between High_Readiness and Perceived_Severity also were significant. However, the relationships between High_Readiness and Perceived_Threat were not significant (P > 0.05). Perceived_threat and Perceived_efficacy were important for smokers with low readiness to quit, while Perceived_efficacy was most important for smokers with high readiness to quit. These findings could be used in promoting lung cancer awareness and designing smoking cessation programs based on smokers' stages of change.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
There is a lack of scientific literature on the application of fear appeals theories to evaluate lung cancer risk perception among smokers. The aim of the present study is to apply the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) to discover the perception of the smokers about their lifetime risk of developing lung cancer (perceived susceptibility), their perception of lung cancer survival (perceived severity), response efficacy, self-efficacy, and readiness to quit.
METHODS
In this cross-sectional study, 215 eligible smokers (aged 45 years and over who have smoked at least 1 pack per day in the last 5 years) were recruited. The data collection tool was designed using validate self-report questionnaires and it was contained items on the perceived risk of a smoker contracting lung cancer and perceived lung cancer survival rate. It also had questions to measure the main constructs of the EPPM and Readiness to quit ("Low_Readiness", and "High_Readiness"). To test how the data support conceptual EPPM to data, Generalized Structural Equation Modeling (GSEM) was used.
RESULTS
Findings showed a significant relationship between Perceived_Susceptibility and Perceived_Response Efficacy; (B = 1.16, P < 0.001); between Perceived_Susceptibility and Perceived_Self Efficacy, (B = -0.93, P < 0.001), Perceived_Severity, and Perceived_Response Efficacy (B = 1.07, P < 0.001). There was also a significant relationship between Perceived_Threat and Perceived_Response Efficacy; between Perceived_Threat and Perceived_Self Efficacy. The relationship between High_Readiness and Perceived_Self Efficacy, and between High_Readiness and Perceived_Severity also were significant. However, the relationships between High_Readiness and Perceived_Threat were not significant (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Perceived_threat and Perceived_efficacy were important for smokers with low readiness to quit, while Perceived_efficacy was most important for smokers with high readiness to quit. These findings could be used in promoting lung cancer awareness and designing smoking cessation programs based on smokers' stages of change.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34657617
doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11896-1
pii: 10.1186/s12889-021-11896-1
pmc: PMC8520616
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1872Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Health Commun. 2019 Oct;34(11):1369-1376
pubmed: 30080982
Arch Iran Med. 2015 Aug;18(8):493-501
pubmed: 26265517
Tob Control. 2013 Jan;22(1):52-8
pubmed: 22218426
Int J Womens Health. 2018 Jan 18;11:1-10
pubmed: 30588127
Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2008 Jun;29(3):223-32
pubmed: 18506660
Prev Med. 2018 May;110:16-23
pubmed: 29410315
Environ Health Perspect. 2014 Oct;122(10):A276-9
pubmed: 25272337
J Appl Commun Res. 2009;37(1):1-20
pubmed: 20046966
Am Psychol. 1992 Sep;47(9):1102-14
pubmed: 1329589
J Environ Public Health. 2012;2012:918368
pubmed: 22649464
Health Educ Behav. 2012 Aug;39(4):455-73
pubmed: 22002250
Prev Med. 2004 Apr;38(4):388-402
pubmed: 15020172
J Immigr Minor Health. 2008 Oct;10(5):423-8
pubmed: 18066716
Chest. 2003 Jan;123(1 Suppl):21S-49S
pubmed: 12527563
Health Commun. 2006;20(1):35-44
pubmed: 16813487
J Res Health Sci. 2015 Fall;15(4):228-33
pubmed: 26728908
Br J Cancer. 2012 Jul 24;107(3):406-7
pubmed: 22828655
Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(1):26-34
pubmed: 20375490
Transl Cancer Res. 2016 Oct;5(Suppl 5):S964-S971
pubmed: 29147644
Int J High Risk Behav Addict. 2015 Mar 20;4(1):e20939
pubmed: 25883917
Health Educ Behav. 2005 Feb;32(1):27-41
pubmed: 15642752
Schizophr Res. 2012 Jul;138(2-3):285-9
pubmed: 22578720
J Cancer Educ. 2011 Dec;26(4):747-53
pubmed: 21688184
Annu Rev Public Health. 1993;14:183-203
pubmed: 8323585
J Korean Med Sci. 2006 Oct;21(5):843-8
pubmed: 17043417
Addict Behav. 2014 Oct;39(10):1398-403
pubmed: 24926907
BMJ Open. 2018 Oct 3;8(10):e021611
pubmed: 30287668
J Health Psychol. 2011 Nov;16(8):1187-97
pubmed: 21464114
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018 Nov 1;110(11):1201-1207
pubmed: 29788259
Psychol Health. 2009 Jan;24(1):81-93
pubmed: 20186641
Health Commun. 2006;20(1):91-9
pubmed: 16813492
East Mediterr Health J. 2014 Apr 03;20(3):190-5
pubmed: 24950077
Tob Control. 2005 Feb;14(1):55-9
pubmed: 15735301
Addict Health. 2013 Summer-Autumn;5(3-4):140-53
pubmed: 24494171
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Jun 24;7(6):e13987
pubmed: 31237239
Psychooncology. 2015 Oct;24(10):1265-1278
pubmed: 26194469
Am J Prev Med. 2004 Jan;26(1):67-80
pubmed: 14700715
Milbank Q. 2008 Dec;86(4):601-27
pubmed: 19120982