Appendix 3
Reasons for exclusion of studies (n=51) in step II.
Paper
Reason for exclusion
Andermann, 2010 1
Review study
Bowen, 2006 2
No empirical evaluation
Bowen, 2010 3
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Briss, 2004 4
Review study
Dahl 2006 5
Review study
Dolan, 2002 6
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Edwards, 2003 7
Review study
Edwards, 2003 8
Review study
Edwards, 2006 9
Review study
Fox, 2006 10
Review study
Goel, 2011 11
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Grindel, 2004 12
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Hargreaves, 2005 13
No empirical evaluation
Hassinger, 2010 14
Intervention aimed at improving knowledge for better
clinical outcomes, no mention of informed choice.
Hillyer, 2011 15
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Jepson, 2001 16
Review paper
Jepson, 2007 17
No empirical evaluation
Jimenez, 2011 18
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Lawrence 2000 19
No empirical evaluation
Lewis, 2011 20
Not peer-reviewed
Lin, 2010 21
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Makoul 2009 22
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Michie 2004 23
Intervention designed to increase rates of antenatal
screening uptake in those intending to undergo
antenatal screening. But the study does not investigate
whether the actual choice was an informed one, based
on sufficient knowledge, or not.
Mullen, 2006 24
No empirical evaluation
Muller, 2006 25
Intervention not aimed at informed choice or any of its
elements
Nagle 2006 26
Same intervention as described by Nagle 200827
(included)
O’Connor, 1999 28
Review study
Parker 2002 29
No empirical evaluation
Parsa, 2011 30
Not peer-reviewed
Potter 2008 31
No empirical evaluation
Raffle 2001 32
No empirical evaluation
Rainis, 2010 33
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Ramirez 2000 34
No empirical evaluation
Rimer, 2001 35
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Rimer, 2002 36
Same intervention as described by Rimer 2001
Rimer, 2004 37
Review study
Rutter, 2006 38
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Sadler 2007 39
Intervention aimed at enabling actual choice/ behaviour
in accordance with attitude, but the study does not
investigate whether the actual choice was based on
sufficient knowledge.
Sadler, 2011 40
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Salkeld, 2003 41
No intervention conducted
Sarfati 199842
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake;
Schroy, 2011 43
Intervention aimed at shared decision making to
improve acceptance and adherence of the screening
Sheeran, 2000 44
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Stapleton, 2002 45
Does not concern one of the relevant screening
programs*
Soskolne, 2007 46
No empirical evaluation
Thornton, 1995 47
Intervention not aimed at informed choice or any of its
elements
Valdez 2001 48
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Wang, 2012 49
Intervention aimed at increasing uptake
Whysall 2006 50
Does not concern a screening programs
Yarbrough 200151
No empirical evaluation
* we restricted our search to prenatal screening for congenital anomalies, neonatal screening for
metabolic diseases, cervical cancer screening, breast cancer screening and colorectal cancer screening.
1. Andermann A, Blancquaert I. Genetic screening: A primer for primary care. Canadian Family Physician
2010;56(4):333-39.
2. Bowen DJ, Allen JD, Vu T, Johnson RE, Fryer-Edwards K, Hart A, Jr. Theoretical foundations for
interventions designed to promote informed decision making for cancer screening. Ann Behav
Med 2006;32(3):202-10.
3. Bowen DJ, Powers D. Effects of a Mail and Telephone Intervention on Breast Health Behaviors. Health
Educ Behav 2010.
4. Briss P, Rimer B, Reilley B, Coates RC, Lee NC, Mullen P, et al. Promoting informed decisions about
cancer screening in communities and healthcare systems. Am J Prev Med 2004;26(1):67-80.
5. Dahl K, Kesmodel U, Hvidman L, Olesen F. Informed consent: Providing information about prenatal
examinations. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2006;85(12):1420-25.
6. Dolan JG, Frisina S. Randomized controlled trial of a patient decision aid for colorectal cancer
screening. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision
Making, 2002:125-39.
7. Edwards A, Unigwe S, Elwyn G, Hood K. Effects of communicating individual risks in screening
programmes: Cochrane systematic review. British Medical Journal 2003;327(7417):703-07.
8. Edwards A, Unigwe S, Elwyn G, Hood K. Personalised risk communication for informed decision
making about entering screening programs. Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online)
2003(1):CD001865.
9. Edwards AG, Evans R, Dundon J, Haigh S, Hood K, Elwyn GJ. Personalised risk communication for
informed decision making about taking screening tests. Cochrane database of systematic
reviews (Online) 2006(4):CD001865.
10. Fox R. Informed choice in screening programmes: do leaflets help? A critical literature review. J
Public Health (Oxf) 2006;28(4):309-17.
11. Goel MS, Gracia G, Baker DW. Development and pilot testing of a culturally sensitive multimedia
program to improve breast cancer screening in Latina women. Patient Educ Couns
2011;84(1):128-31.
12. Grindel CG, Brown L, Caplan L, Blumenthal D. The effect of breast cancer screening messages on
knowledge, attitudes, perceived risk, and mammography screening of African American women
in the rural South. Oncol Nurs Forum 2004;31(4):801-08.
13. Hargreaves K, Stewart R, Oliver S. Newborn screening information supports public health more than
informed choice. Health Education Journal 2005;64(2):110-19.
14. Hassinger JP, Holubar SD, Pendlimari R, Dozois EJ, Larson DW, Cima RR. Effectiveness of a
multimedia-based educational intervention for improving colon cancer literacy in screening
colonoscopy patients. Dis Colon Rectum 2010;53(9):1301-7.
15. Hillyer GC, Basch CE, Schmitt KM, Neugut AI. Feasibility and efficacy of pairing fecal immunochemical
testing with mammography for increasing colorectal cancer screening among uninsured Latinas
in northern Manhattan. Prev Med 2011;53(3):194-8.
16. Jepson RG, Forbes CA, Sowden AJ, Lewis RA. Increasing informed uptake and non-uptake of
screening: evidence from a systematic review. Health Expect 2001;4(2):116-26.
17. Jepson RG, Hewison J, Thompson A, Weller D. Patient perspectives on information and choice in
cancer screening: a qualitative study in the UK. Soc Sci Med 2007;65(5):890-99.
18. Jimenez EA, Xie Y, Goldsteen K, Chalas E. Promoting knowledge of cancer prevention and screening
in an underserved Hispanic women population: a culturally sensitive education program. Health
promotion practice 2011;12(5):689-95.
19. Lawrence VA, Streiner D, Hazuda HP, Naylor R, Levine M, Gafni A. A cross-cultural consumer-based
decision aid for screening mammography. Preventive Medicine 2000;30(3):200-08.
20. Lewis C, DeLeon CP, Pignone MP, Golin C. Patient and physician discussions after decision support
for colorectal cancer screening in the elderly. Journal of General Internal Medicine
2011;26:S118.
21. Lin ZC, Effken JA. Effects of a tailored web-based educational intervention on women's perceptions
of and intentions to obtain mammography. J Clin Nurs 2010;19(9-10):1261-9.
22. Makoul G, Cameron KA, Baker DW, Francis L, Scholtens D, Wolf MS. A multimedia patient education
program on colorectal cancer screening increases knowledge and willingness to consider
screening among Hispanic/Latino patients. Patient Educ Couns 2009;76(2):220-26.
23. Michie S, Dormandy E, Marteau TM. Increasing screening uptake amongst those intending to be
screened: the use of action plans. Patient Educ Couns 2004;55(2):218-22.
24. Mullen PD, Allen JD, Glanz K, Fernandez ME, Bowen DJ, Pruitt SL, et al. Measures used in studies of
informed decision making about cancer screening: a systematic review. Ann Behav Med
2006;32(3):188-201.
25. Muller MA, Bleker OP, Bonsel GJ, Bilardo CM. Nuchal translucency screening and anxiety levels in
pregnancy and puerperium. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27(4):357-61.
26. Nagle C, Lewis S, Meiser B, Metcalfe S, Carlin JB, Bell R, et al. Evaluation of a decision aid for prenatal
testing of fetal abnormalities: A cluster randomised trial [ISRCTN22532458]. BMC Public Health,
2006:96.
27. Nagle C, Gunn J, Bell R, Lewis S, Meiser B, Metcalfe S, et al. Use of a decision aid for prenatal testing
of fetal abnormalities to improve women's informed decision making: A cluster randomised
controlled trial [ISRCTN22532458]. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and
Gynaecology 2008;115(3):339-47.
28. O'Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V, Tetroe J, Entwistle V, Llewellyn-Thomas H, et al. Decision aids for
patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. Bmj
1999;319(7212):731-34.
29. Parker MH, Forbes KL, Findlay I. Eugenics or empowered choice? Community issues arising from
prenatal testing. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
2002;42(1):10-14.
30. Parsa P, Kandiah M. Efficacy of an educational intervention on breast cancer screening behaviour
among malaysian women. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2011;21(12):S965.
31. Potter BK, O'Reilly N, Etchegary H, Howley H, Graham ID, Walker M, et al. Exploring informed choice
in the context of prenatal testing: findings from a qualitative study. Health Expect
2008;11(4):355-65.
32. Raffle AE. Information about screening - is it to achieve high uptake or to ensure informed choice?
Health Expect 2001;4(2):92-98.
33. Rainis T, Halloun L, Keren D, Shuv-ami I, Lavy A. Colorectal cancer among Arab-Israeli women-possible reasons for increased incidence and mortality. J Gastrointest Cancer 2010;41(2):130-4.
34. Ramirez AG, Suarez L, Laufman L, Barroso C, Chalela P. Hispanic women's breast and cervical cancer
knowledge, attitudes, and screening behaviors. Am J Health Promot 2000;14(5):292-300.
35. Rimer BK, Halabi S, Skinner CS, Kaplan EB, Crawford Y, Samsa GP, et al. The short-term impact of
tailored mammography decision-making interventions. Patient Education and Counseling
2001;43(3):269-85.
36. Rimer BK, Halabi S, Sugg Skinner C, Lipkus IM, Strigo TS, Kaplan EB, et al. Effects of a mammography
decision-making intervention at 12 and 24 months. American Journal of Preventive Medicine
2002;22(4):247-57.
37. Rimer BK, Briss PA, Zeller PK, Chan EC, Woolf SH. Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer
screening? Cancer 2004;101(5 Suppl):1214-28.
38. Rutter DR, Steadman L, Quine L. An implementation intentions intervention to increase uptake of
mammography. Ann Behav Med 2006;32(2):127-34.
39. Sadler GR, Ko CM, Cohn JA, White M, Weldon RN, Wu P. Breast cancer knowledge, attitudes, and
screening behaviors among African American women: the Black cosmetologists promoting
health program. BMC Public Health 2007;7:57.
40. Sadler GR, Ko CM, Wu P, Alisangco J, Castaneda SF, Kelly C. A cluster randomized controlled trial to
increase breast cancer screening among African American women: the black cosmetologists
promoting health program. J Natl Med Assoc 2011;103(8):735-45.
41. Salkeld GP, Solomon MJ, Short L, Ward J. Measuring the importance of attributes that influence
consumer attitudes to colorectal cancer screening. ANZ J Surg 2003;73(3):128-32.
42. The palpable breast lump: information and recommendations to assist decision-making when a
breast lump is detected. The Steering Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and
Treatment of Breast Cancer. Canadian Association of Radiation Oncologists. CMAJ : Canadian
Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne 1998;158 Suppl 3:S38.
43. Schroy PC, Emmons K, Peters E, Glick JT, Robinson PA, Lydotes MA, et al. The impact of a novel
computer-based decision aid on shared decision making for colorectal cancer screening: a
randomized trial. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical
Decision Making, 2011:93-107.
44. Sheeran P, Orbell S. Using implementation intentions to increase attendance for cervical cancer
screening. Health Psychol 2000;19(3):283-89.
45. Stapleton H, Kirkham M, Thomas G. Qualitative study of evidence based leaflets in maternity care.
Bmj 2002;324(7338):639.
46. Soskolne V, Marie S, Manor O. Beliefs, recommendations and intentions are important explanatory
factors of mammography screening behavior among Muslim Arab women in Israel. Health Educ
Res 2007;22(5):665-76.
47. Thornton JG, Hewison J, Lilford RJ, Vail A. A randomised trial of three methods of giving information
about prenatal testing. Bmj 1995;311(7013):1127-30.
48. Valdez A, Banerjee K, Fernandez M, Ackerson L. Impact of a multimedia breast cancer education
intervention on use of mammography by low-income Latinas. J Cancer Educ 2001;16(4):221-24.
49. Wang JH, Schwartz MD, Luta G, Maxwell AE, Mandelblatt JS. Intervention tailoring for Chinese
American women: comparing the effects of two videos on knowledge, attitudes and intentions
to obtain a mammogram. Health Educ Res 2012.
50. Whysall Z, Haslam C, Haslam R. A stage of change approach to reducing occupational ill health. Prev
Med 2006;43(5):422-28.
51. Yarbrough SS, Braden CJ. Utility of health belief model as a guide for explaining or predicting breast
cancer screening behaviours. J Adv Nurs 2001;33(5):677-88.