Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople

Balancing the benefits and harms of mammography screening is difficult and involves a value judgement. Screening is both a medical and a social intervention, therefore public opinion could be considered when deciding if mammography screening programmes should be implemented and continued. Opinion po...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Manja D. Jensen, Kasper M. Hansen, Volkert Siersma, John Brodersen
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/a2713300027d4fd4aec9c747175c557f
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:a2713300027d4fd4aec9c747175c557f
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:a2713300027d4fd4aec9c747175c557f2021-11-04T06:07:16ZUsing a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople1932-6203https://doaj.org/article/a2713300027d4fd4aec9c747175c557f2021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8530304/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203Balancing the benefits and harms of mammography screening is difficult and involves a value judgement. Screening is both a medical and a social intervention, therefore public opinion could be considered when deciding if mammography screening programmes should be implemented and continued. Opinion polls have revealed high levels of public enthusiasm for cancer screening, however, the public tends to overestimate the benefits and underestimate the harms. In the search for better public decision on mammography screening, this study investigated the quality of public opinion arising from a Deliberative Poll. In a Deliberative Poll a representative group of people is brought together to deliberate with each other and with experts based on specific information. Before, during and after the process, the participants’ opinions are assessed. In our Deliberative Poll a representative sample of the Danish population aged between 18 and 70 participated. They studied an online video and took part in five hours of intense online deliberation. We used survey data at four timepoints during the study, from recruitment to one month after the poll, to estimate the quality of decisions by the following outcomes: 1) Knowledge; 2) Ability to form opinions; 3) Opinion stability, and 4) Opinion consistency. The proportion of participants with a high level of knowledge increased from 1% at recruitment to 56% after receiving video information. More people formed an opinion regarding the effectiveness of the screening programme (12%), the economy of the programme (27%), and the ethical dilemmas of screening (10%) due to the process of information and deliberation. For 11 out of 14 opinion items, the within-item correlations between the first two inquiry time points were smaller than the correlations between later timepoints. This indicates increased opinion stability. The correlations between three pairs of opinion items deemed theoretically related a priori all increased, indicating increased opinion consistency. Overall, the combined process of online information and deliberation increased opinion quality about mammography screening by increasing knowledge and the ability to form stable and consistent opinions.Manja D. JensenKasper M. HansenVolkert SiersmaJohn BrodersenPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 10 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Manja D. Jensen Kasper M. Hansen Volkert Siersma John Brodersen Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople
description	Balancing the benefits and harms of mammography screening is difficult and involves a value judgement. Screening is both a medical and a social intervention, therefore public opinion could be considered when deciding if mammography screening programmes should be implemented and continued. Opinion polls have revealed high levels of public enthusiasm for cancer screening, however, the public tends to overestimate the benefits and underestimate the harms. In the search for better public decision on mammography screening, this study investigated the quality of public opinion arising from a Deliberative Poll. In a Deliberative Poll a representative group of people is brought together to deliberate with each other and with experts based on specific information. Before, during and after the process, the participants’ opinions are assessed. In our Deliberative Poll a representative sample of the Danish population aged between 18 and 70 participated. They studied an online video and took part in five hours of intense online deliberation. We used survey data at four timepoints during the study, from recruitment to one month after the poll, to estimate the quality of decisions by the following outcomes: 1) Knowledge; 2) Ability to form opinions; 3) Opinion stability, and 4) Opinion consistency. The proportion of participants with a high level of knowledge increased from 1% at recruitment to 56% after receiving video information. More people formed an opinion regarding the effectiveness of the screening programme (12%), the economy of the programme (27%), and the ethical dilemmas of screening (10%) due to the process of information and deliberation. For 11 out of 14 opinion items, the within-item correlations between the first two inquiry time points were smaller than the correlations between later timepoints. This indicates increased opinion stability. The correlations between three pairs of opinion items deemed theoretically related a priori all increased, indicating increased opinion consistency. Overall, the combined process of online information and deliberation increased opinion quality about mammography screening by increasing knowledge and the ability to form stable and consistent opinions.
format	article
author	Manja D. Jensen Kasper M. Hansen Volkert Siersma John Brodersen
author_facet	Manja D. Jensen Kasper M. Hansen Volkert Siersma John Brodersen
author_sort	Manja D. Jensen
title	Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople
title_short	Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople
title_full	Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople
title_fullStr	Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople
title_full_unstemmed	Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople
title_sort	using a deliberative poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/a2713300027d4fd4aec9c747175c557f
work_keys_str_mv	AT manjadjensen usingadeliberativepollonbreastcancerscreeningtoassessandimprovethedecisionqualityoflaypeople AT kaspermhansen usingadeliberativepollonbreastcancerscreeningtoassessandimprovethedecisionqualityoflaypeople AT volkertsiersma usingadeliberativepollonbreastcancerscreeningtoassessandimprovethedecisionqualityoflaypeople AT johnbrodersen usingadeliberativepollonbreastcancerscreeningtoassessandimprovethedecisionqualityoflaypeople
_version_	1718445166922039296

Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople

Ejemplares similares