Acceptability and potential impact on uptake of using different risk stratification approaches to determine eligibility for screening: A population-based survey.

Change log
Usher-Smith, Juliet A  ORCID logo
Harvey-Kelly, Laragh LW 
Rossi, Sabrina H 
Harrison, Hannah 
Griffin, Simon J 

BACKGROUND: Using risk stratification approaches to determine eligibility has the potential to improve efficiency of screening. OBJECTIVES: To compare the public acceptability and potential impact on uptake of using different approaches to determine eligibility for screening. DESIGN: An online population-based survey of 668 adults in the UK aged 45-79 including a series of scenarios in the context of a potential kidney cancer screening programme in which eligibility was determined by age, sex, age and sex combined, a simple risk score (age, sex, body mass index, smoking status), a complex risk score additionally incorporating family history and lifestyle, or a genetic risk score. OUTCOME MEASURES: We used multi-level ordinal logistic regression to compare acceptability and potential uptake within individuals and multivariable ordinal logistic regression differences between individuals. RESULTS: Using sex, age and sex, or the simple risk score were less acceptable than age (P < .0001). All approaches were less acceptable to women than men. Over 70% were comfortable waiting until they were older if the complex risk score or genetics indicated a low risk. If told they were high risk, 85% would be more likely to take up screening. Being told they were low risk had no overall influence on uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Varying the starting age of screening based on estimated risk from models incorporating phenotypic or genetic risk factors would be acceptable to most individuals and may increase uptake. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Two members of the public contributed to the development of the survey and have commented on this paper.

acceptability, public attitudes, risk stratification, screening, Adult, Early Detection of Cancer, Female, Humans, Logistic Models, Male, Mass Screening, Risk Assessment, Surveys and Questionnaires
Journal Title
Health Expect
Conference Name
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
All rights reserved
Cancer Research UK (21464)
Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12015/4)
MRC (MC_UU_00006/6)
Cancer Research UK (A25117)
This work was funded by a research grant from Kidney Cancer UK. JUS was supported by a Cancer Research UK Cancer Prevention Fellowship (C55650/A21464). SHR is supported by The Urology Foundation and a Cancer Research UK Clinical Research Fellowship. GDS is funded by the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Cancer Centre (Major Centre Award A25117) and the Renal Cancer Research Fund. HH is supported by a National Institute of Health Research Methods Fellowship (RM-SR-2017-09-009). The University of Cambridge has received salary support in respect of SJG from the NHS in the East of England through the Clinical Academic Reserve.
Is supplemented by: