Survey on determinants of intention to reduce nasopharyngeal cancer risk: an application of the theory of planned behavior.

Su-Hie Ting, Rayenda Khresna Brahmana, Collin Jerome, Yuwana Podin
Author Information
  1. Su-Hie Ting: Faculty of Language and Communication, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, 94300, Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, Malaysia. shting@unimas.my.
  2. Rayenda Khresna Brahmana: College of Business Administration, University of Bahrain, Sakhir, 32038, Kingdom of Bahrain. ORCID
  3. Collin Jerome: Faculty of Language and Communication, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, 94300, Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, Malaysia.
  4. Yuwana Podin: Institute of Health and Community Medicine, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, 94300, Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, Malaysia.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To have better prognostic outcomes and minimize deaths due to nasopharyngeal cancer, it is vital to understand factors that motivate the public to undertake cancer preventive measures. The study investigated determinants of intention to adopt measures to reduce nasopharyngeal cancer risk using the Theory of Planned Behavior.
METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was conducted on Malaysians (n = 515) using a questionnaire on attitudes, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, knowledge of nasopharyngeal cancer, past nasopharyngeal cancer preventive behavior, and intention to adopt preventive measures. The attitudes construct encompassed perceptions of susceptibility, severity, benefits and barriers. Hierarchical regression of mediation effect under structural equation model approach was used to test the theory. The model was re-estimated using the two-stage least square approach by instrumental approach. Next the Maximum Likelihood Estimation-Structural Equation Modeling was conducted to gauge the instrumentation and check the robustness of the model's simultaneity.
RESULTS: The respondents had moderate knowledge of nasopharyngeal cancer, and reported high levels of perceived risk, perceived severity and perceived behavioral control. The respondents were under little social pressure (subjective norm) to perform nasopharyngeal cancer preventive actions, marginally believed in the benefits of medical tests and reported few barriers. The Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modeling results show that the relationship between intention and four independent variables were significant (perceived behavioral control, perceived risk, perceived severity, marital status) at p < .05. Tests of Two-stage Least Square Approach and Maximum Likelihood Estimation-Structural Equation Modeling confirm the four key factors in determining the intention to reduce nasopharyngeal cancer risk. The variance explained by these factors is 33.01 and 32.73% using Two-stage Least Square Approach and Maximum Likelihood Estimation-Structural Equation Modeling respectively. Intention to undertake nasopharyngeal cancer risk-reducing behavior has no significant relationship with subjective norm, attitudes (perceived benefits and barriers to screening), knowledge of nasopharyngeal cancer and past behavior in enacting nasopharyngeal cancer preventive measures. The only demographic variable that affects intention is marital status. Gender, age, race, religion, education level, and income are not significantly associated with intention.
CONCLUSIONS: In contexts where knowledge of nasopharyngeal cancer is moderate, the factors associated with the intention to reduce risk are perceived risk and severity, perceived behavioral control, and marital status.

Keywords

References

  1. Health Commun. 2009 Apr;24(3):210-8 [PMID: 19415553]
  2. Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Feb;74(2):221-7 [PMID: 19059747]
  3. Psychol Health. 2016 Nov;31(11):1359-74 [PMID: 27373454]
  4. BMC Womens Health. 2021 Jan 28;21(1):41 [PMID: 33509175]
  5. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2016 Jan;25(1):38-48 [PMID: 26052964]
  6. BMC Med Educ. 2010 Nov 18;10:81 [PMID: 21087467]
  7. Cancers (Basel). 2020 Aug 17;12(8): [PMID: 32824510]
  8. Soc Sci Med (1967). 1978 Dec;12(3D-4D):149-56 [PMID: 734454]
  9. Health Commun. 2018 May;33(5):576-584 [PMID: 28278604]
  10. Community Health Stud. 1984;8(1):33-44 [PMID: 6713819]
  11. PLoS One. 2021 Jan 22;16(1):e0245856 [PMID: 33481894]
  12. Nurs Res. 1997 Nov-Dec;46(6):331-7 [PMID: 9422052]
  13. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 1984 Apr;6(3):73-85 [PMID: 6426380]
  14. Fam Pract. 2010 Feb;27(1):77-84 [PMID: 19833822]
  15. BMC Public Health. 2016 Mar 02;16:213 [PMID: 26935960]
  16. Cancer. 2008 Mar 1;112(5):1153-61 [PMID: 18189306]
  17. J Health Commun. 2015;20(12):1406-14 [PMID: 26161622]
  18. PLoS One. 2020 Oct 9;15(10):e0239254 [PMID: 33035219]
  19. Health Educ Behav. 2015 Oct;42(5):621-6 [PMID: 25712240]
  20. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Sep 24;16(19): [PMID: 31554338]
  21. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012 Feb;269(2):649-58 [PMID: 21691719]
  22. J Community Health. 2020 Dec;45(6):1187-1195 [PMID: 32418009]
  23. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019 Dec;45(12):2440-2451 [PMID: 31475426]
  24. Int J Cancer. 1998 Jul 17;77(2):228-35 [PMID: 9650558]
  25. J Health Commun. 2014;19(3):340-58 [PMID: 24015807]
  26. J Cancer Epidemiol. 2020 Mar 19;2020:3024578 [PMID: 32256590]
  27. Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2018;5(3):214-220 [PMID: 30148040]
  28. Support Care Cancer. 2008 Sep;16(9):987-97 [PMID: 18274783]
  29. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007 May;16(5):998-1003 [PMID: 17507628]
  30. Psychooncology. 2015 Oct;24(10):1233-1240 [PMID: 26042656]
  31. Singapore Med J. 2000 Dec;41(12):582-7 [PMID: 11296783]
  32. J Community Health. 2021 Jun;46(3):457-470 [PMID: 32638198]
  33. BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 6;10(8):e037619 [PMID: 32764087]
  34. Int J Womens Health. 2020 Dec 17;12:1215-1222 [PMID: 33363414]
  35. Prev Med. 2004 Apr;38(4):388-402 [PMID: 15020172]

MeSH Term

Attitude
Cross-Sectional Studies
Humans
Intention
Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms
Surveys and Questionnaires

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0cancernasopharyngealperceivedintentionriskpreventivebehavioralcontrolbehaviorfactorsmeasuresreduceusingnormknowledgeseverityEquationModelingattitudessubjectivebenefitsbarriersapproachMaximumLikelihoodEstimation-StructuralLeastmaritalstatusundertakedeterminantsadoptTheoryconductedpastmodeltheoryrespondentsmoderatereportedrelationshipfoursignificantTwo-stageSquareApproachIntentionassociatedplannedBACKGROUND:betterprognosticoutcomesminimizedeathsduevitalunderstandmotivatepublicstudyinvestigatedPlannedBehaviorMETHOD:cross-sectionalsurveyMalaysiansn = 515questionnaireconstructencompassedperceptionssusceptibilityHierarchicalregressionmediationeffectstructuralequationusedtestre-estimatedtwo-stageleastsquareinstrumentalNextgaugeinstrumentationcheckrobustnessmodel'ssimultaneityRESULTS:highlevelslittlesocialpressureperformactionsmarginallybelievedmedicaltestsPartialSquares-Structuralresultsshowindependentvariablesp <05Testsconfirmkeydeterminingvarianceexplained33013273%respectivelyrisk-reducingscreeningenactingdemographicvariableaffectsGenderageracereligioneducationlevelincomesignificantlyCONCLUSIONS:contextsSurveyrisk:applicationAttitudesNasopharyngealPerceivedSubjectiveprevention

Similar Articles

Cited By