Subjective and Objective Cancer Screening Knowledge Among White- and Blue-Collar Chinese Midlife Adults
- 133 Downloads
Cancer is the leading cause of death among Chinese, yet little is known about cancer knowledge among this population. The study described the subjective and objective cancer screening knowledge among white- versus blue-collar Chinese midlife adults. A convenient sample of white-collar adults age 40+ years was recruited from government and academic agencies; and blue-collar adults age 40+ years were recruited from manufactory companies in Taiwan. An eight-item cancer screening knowledge test (CSKT) was used to measure objective knowledge and one five-point Likert scale item for assessing subjective (perceived) cancer screening knowledge. A total of 208 white- and 533 blue-collar workers completed the survey during 2008–2011. Mean ages between groups were comparable (41.1 versus 46.3 years), as well as family cancer history (41.5 %). About 76 % of the white-collar and 43 % of the blue-collar adults had college education. The mean score of the CSKT was lower in the blue-collar versus white-collar workers, 5.4 (SD = 1.76) versus 6.1 (SD = 1.40), indicating on average, 68 versus 76 % of the participants answered the cancer knowledge correctly. The subjective knowledge levels were, however, higher among the blue-collar workers (mean rating of 3.22 versus 2.78). The CSKT showed a good mix of relatively easy and moderately difficult items in both groups. Study showed that overall cancer screening knowledge was low among Chinese midlife adults. Although blue-collar workers scored lower on CSKT, the perceived knowledge level was higher. Results also suggest attention to communicating cancer screening information among Chinese blue-collar midlife workers in particular.
KeywordsCancer knowledge Chinese Midlife adults Subjective knowledge Workplace
This study was partially supported by a research grant from the Chiang-Ching Kuo Foundation (CCKF) for International Scholarly Exchange. The authors would like to thank the help from Dr. Hsiao, T.J. for his coordination on the data collection at the blue-collar worker sites in Taiwan. Special thanks also goes to Drs. Ho-Shong Hou and Peng-His Hou for their support and coordination on the data collection at the white-collar worker sites in Taiwan.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
The study was approved by the human subject review board of the principal investigator’s institution.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2..Stewart, B. and C.P. 2014. Wild, World Cancer Report 2014. Lyon, France: International Agency or Research on Cancer (IARC) Press.Google Scholar
- 4..Cancer Research U.K.: World cancer factsheet. 2012. International Agency for Research on Cancer: Lyon, France: International Agency or Research on Cancer (IARC) Press.Google Scholar
- 5..U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. (2016). Published recommendations. Accessed Mar. 9, 2016, http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/BrowseRec/Index
- 7.Hou S, Hou. PH, Hou HS (2014) The impact of a colorectal cancers worksite screening intervention on knowledge, screening beliefs, and uptakes among middle- and older-age employees in Taiwan. J Cancer Educ 29(suppl 1):S12–S13Google Scholar
- 13.World Health Organization. 2014. Comprehensive cervical cancer control—a guide to essential practice second edition. Geneva: WHO Press. Accessed May 15, 2016. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/144785/1/9789241548953_eng.pdf?ua%3d1.
- 27..Get screened at 40. 2013. American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO). Accessed Aug 22 2013. http://www.geteyesmart.org/eyesmart/living/screening.cfm
- 29..Hou, S and Liu L. 2015.Objective and subjective cancer knowledge among faith-based younger vs. older Chinese adults. Paper presented at GSA’s 68th Annual Scientific Meeting, Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
- 30.Gummersbach E, Schmitten J, Mortsiefer A, Abholz H-H, Wegscheider K, Pentzek M (2015) Willingness to participate in mammography screening a randomized controlled questionnaire study of responses to two patient information leaflets with different factual content. Deutsches Arzteblatt International 112:61–68PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar