» Articles » PMID: 21876191

Cancer Fatalism: Deterring Early Presentation and Increasing Social Inequalities?

Overview
Date 2011 Aug 31
PMID 21876191
Citations 49
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Fatalistic beliefs about cancer have been implicated in low uptake of screening and delay in presentation particularly in low socioeconomic status (SES) groups, but no studies have systematically evaluated interrelationships between SES, fatalism, and early detection behaviors. We explored whether (i) fatalism is associated with negative attitudes toward early detection, (ii) lower SES groups are more fatalistic, and (iii) SES differences in fatalism partly explain SES differences in attitudes toward early detection.

Methods: In a population-representative sample of adults in Britain using computer-based interviews in the home setting, respondents (N = 2,018) answered two questions to index fatalism (expectations of cancer survival and cure) and two items on early detection attitudes (the perceived value of early detection and fear of symptom reporting). SES was indexed with a social grade classification.

Results: Fatalism was associated with being less positive about early detection (β = -0.40, P < 0.001) and more fearful about seeking help for a suspicious symptom (β = 0.24, P < 0.001). Lower SES groups were more fatalistic (β = -0.21, P < 0.001). Path analyses suggest that SES differences in fatalism might explain SES differences in attitudes about early detection.

Conclusions: In this population sample, SES differences in fatalism partly explained SES differences in the perceived value of early detection and fear of symptom presentation.

Impact: Fatalistic beliefs about cancer should be targeted to promote early presentation of cancer and this may be particularly important for lower SES groups.

Citing Articles

Adherence to cervical cancer screening in France: factors influencing the healthcare professionals' decisions-a qualitative study.

Mignot S, Naiditch N, Llorens J, Fritel X BMJ Open. 2024; 14(11):e084795.

PMID: 39572088 PMC: 11580271. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084795.


Status and Determinants of Early Detection of Oral Premalignant and Malignant Lesions in India.

Shruti T, Khanna D, Khan A, Dandpat A, Tiwari M, Singh A Cancer Control. 2023; 30:10732748231159556.

PMID: 36809192 PMC: 9947682. DOI: 10.1177/10732748231159556.


Understanding patient barriers and facilitators to uptake of lung screening using low dose computed tomography: a mixed methods scoping review of the current literature.

Cavers D, Nelson M, Rostron J, Robb K, Brown L, Campbell C Respir Res. 2022; 23(1):374.

PMID: 36564817 PMC: 9789658. DOI: 10.1186/s12931-022-02255-8.


Impact of a Cancer Health Education Curriculum Among Milwaukee Public High School Students.

Kerschner A, Jensik K, Berg D, Visotcky A, Banerjee A, Stolley M J Cancer Educ. 2022; 38(3):1034-1041.

PMID: 36251146 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-022-02228-x.


Identifying key barriers to effective breast cancer control in rural settings.

Sprague B, Ahern T, Herschorn S, Sowden M, Weaver D, Wood M Prev Med. 2021; 152(Pt 2):106741.

PMID: 34302837 PMC: 8545865. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106741.


References
1.
Pill R, Peters T, Robling M . Social class and preventive health behaviour: a British example. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1995; 49(1):28-32. PMC: 1060070. DOI: 10.1136/jech.49.1.28. View

2.
Mayo R, Ureda J, Parker V . Importance of fatalism in understanding mammography screening in rural elderly women. J Women Aging. 2001; 13(1):57-72. DOI: 10.1300/J074v13n01_05. View

3.
Chavez L, Hubbell F, Mishra S, Valdez R . The influence of fatalism on self-reported use of Papanicolaou smears. Am J Prev Med. 1998; 13(6):418-24. View

4.
Niederdeppe J, Gurmankin Levy A . Fatalistic beliefs about cancer prevention and three prevention behaviors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007; 16(5):998-1003. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0608. View

5.
Smith L, Pope C, Botha J . Patients' help-seeking experiences and delay in cancer presentation: a qualitative synthesis. Lancet. 2005; 366(9488):825-31. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67030-4. View