Impact of informed-choice invitations on diabetes screening knowledge, attitude and intentions: an analogue study
Kinmonth, Ann Louise
Griffin, Simon J.
Marteau, Theresa M.
MetadataShow full item record
Mann, E., Kellar, I., Sutton, S., Kinmonth, A. L., Hankins, M., Griffin, S. J., & Marteau, T. M. (2010). Impact of informed-choice invitations on diabetes screening knowledge, attitude and intentions: an analogue study.
RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are.
Abstract Background Despite concerns that facilitating informed choice would decrease diabetes screening uptake, 'informed choice' invitations that increased knowledge did not affect attendance (the DICISION trial). We explored possible reasons using data from an experimental analogue study undertaken to develop the invitations. We tested a model of the impact on knowledge, attitude and intentions of a diabetes screening invitation designed to facilitate informed choices. Methods 417 men and women aged 40-69 recruited from town centres in the UK were randomised to receive either an invitation for diabetes screening designed to facilitate informed choice or a standard type of invitation. Knowledge of the invitation, attitude towards diabetes screening, and intention to attend for diabetes screening were assessed two weeks later. Results Attitude was a strong predictor of screening intentions (β = .64, p = .001). Knowledge added to the model but was a weak predictor of intentions (β = .13, p = .005). However, invitation type did not predict attitudes towards screening but did predict knowledge (β = -.45, p = .001), which mediated a small effect of invitation type on intention (indirect β = -.06, p = .017). Conclusions These findings may explain why information about the benefits and harms of screening did not reduce diabetes screening attendance in the DICISION trial.
This record's URL: http://www.dspace.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/237775
Rights Holder: Mann et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.