Forecasting changes in preference over the life span: a qualitative study of African–American men’s prostate cancer decision making
- 110 Downloads
Goals of work
The goal of this study was to explore the processes by which African–American men, at greatest risk, might forecast and manage health changes as they age if they were diagnosed with prostate cancer.
Patients and methods
Twenty-nine African–American men, 40–70 years old, with no history of prostate cancer, participated in four focus groups and four follow-up individual interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using Grounded Theory, with thematic analysis and constant comparison of data.
There was a curvilinear relationship between age and participants’ preference for quality versus quantity of life in deciding to treat prostate cancer. Two mechanisms accounted for this: a change with age in the (1) reference point for judging value and (2) decision-making goal.
With increasing long-term survivorship, it is vital to understand the multiple decisions cancer patients will face as they continue to age. The current study is an initial step in studying how patients might anticipate and manage such changes.
KeywordsProstate cancer Cancer survivors Decision making over the lifespan
The authors thank the patients and doctors for their participation and Josh Hemmerich for his assistance in gathering the data. Partial support for this research came from the Portes Foundation. The authors’ work was independent of the funders, including the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript.
- 1.Barnholtz-Sloan J, Severson R, Vaishampayan U et al (2003) Survival analysis of distant prostate cancer by decade (1973–1997) in the Detroit Metropolitan Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program registry: has outcome improved? (United States) Cancer Causes Control 14:681–685PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Anonymous (2002) Diagnosing prostate cancer: part 1: PSA test not a gold standard. Diagn Innovation 11:3–9Google Scholar
- 7.Kahneman D, Tversky A (2000) Choices, values and frames. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 11.Miles M, Huberman M (1994) An expanded sourcebook: qualitative data analysis, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
- 13.Norton M, Monin B, Cooper J et al (2003) Vicarious dissonance: attitude change from the inconsistency of others. JPSP 85:47–62Google Scholar
- 16.Ries L, Melbert D, Krapcho M, et al. (2007) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2004. National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/. Accessed 15 November 2007
- 18.Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar