120017
论文已发表
注册即可获取德孚的最新动态
IF 收录期刊
- 3.6 Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)
- 4.3 Clin Epidemiol
- 2.6 Cancer Manag Res
- 3.2 Infect Drug Resist
- 4.1 Clin Interv Aging
- 6.1 Drug Des Dev Ther
- 4.1 Int J Chronic Obstr
- 8.7 Int J Nanomed
- 2.5 Int J Women's Health
- 3.2 Neuropsych Dis Treat
- 2.4 OncoTargets Ther
- 2.6 Patient Prefer Adher
- 2.6 Ther Clin Risk Manag
- 3.1 J Pain Res
- 3.5 Diabet Metab Synd Ob
- 4.5 Psychol Res Behav Ma
- 3.4 Nat Sci Sleep
- 2.4 Pharmgenomics Pers Med
- 2.6 Risk Manag Healthc Policy
- 4.6 J Inflamm Res
- 2.3 Int J Gen Med
- 3.9 J Hepatocell Carcinoma
- 3.3 J Asthma Allergy
- 2.5 Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol
- 3.0 J Multidiscip Healthc
已发表论文
肝癌患者一级亲属在肝癌筛查中面临的决策冲突：中国一项横断面研究
Authors Zhang J, Xia J, Su N, Wu Y, Wang S, Tao X
Received 5 August 2025
Accepted for publication 22 January 2026
Published 10 February 2026 Volume 2026:20 558424
DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S558424
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen
Jiawei Zhang, Jin Xia, Ningning Su, Yanfei Wu, Sihan Wang, Xiaoman Tao
Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People’s Republic of China
Correspondence: Jin Xia, Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No. 288, Tianwen Avenue, Nanan District, Chongqing, 400010, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 15772329636, Email 300425@hospital.cqmu.cn
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the level of decision conflict regarding liver cancer screening among first-degree relatives (FDRs) of liver cancer patients, and to explore its associations with decision preparation, social support, and health literacy management.
Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study enrolled 172 FDRs of liver cancer patients from a tertiary general hospital in Chongqing, China. Data was collected using the General Information Survey, the Decision Conflict Scale, the Preparation for Decision-Making Scale, the Perceived Social Support Scale, and the Health Literacy Management Scale. Descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson correlation analysis, and multivariate regression analysis were performed to identify factors influencing decision conflict.
Results: The total score of decision conflict was 33.37 (SD = 13.38). Specifically, 40.11% of participants (n = 69) reported clinically significant decision conflict (score ≥ 37.5), and an additional 36.63% (n = 63) reported scores between 25 and 37.5, indicating a tendency toward decisional delay. Multiple linear regression analysis identified the educational level of FDRs and prior liver cancer screening experience as significant determinants. Higher decision conflict scores were associated with lower decision preparation (β = − 0.562, P < 0.001), lower social support (β = − 0.580, P < 0.001), and lower health literacy management (β = − 0.232, P = 0.023). The model accounted for 71.6% of the total variance.
Conclusion: FDRs of liver cancer patients experience moderate decision conflict regarding liver cancer screening. To address this issue, the development of structured decision aids incorporating liver cancer screening education and clear risk-benefit information is recommended. Interventions should prioritize enhancing patients’ understanding and preparedness for decision making, particularly among individuals with lower educational attainment or no prior screening experience.
Keywords: liver cancer, first-degree relatives, FDRs, liver cancer screening, decision conflict, factor analysis
Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People’s Republic of China
Correspondence: Jin Xia, Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No. 288, Tianwen Avenue, Nanan District, Chongqing, 400010, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 15772329636, Email 300425@hospital.cqmu.cn
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the level of decision conflict regarding liver cancer screening among first-degree relatives (FDRs) of liver cancer patients, and to explore its associations with decision preparation, social support, and health literacy management.
Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study enrolled 172 FDRs of liver cancer patients from a tertiary general hospital in Chongqing, China. Data was collected using the General Information Survey, the Decision Conflict Scale, the Preparation for Decision-Making Scale, the Perceived Social Support Scale, and the Health Literacy Management Scale. Descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson correlation analysis, and multivariate regression analysis were performed to identify factors influencing decision conflict.
Results: The total score of decision conflict was 33.37 (SD = 13.38). Specifically, 40.11% of participants (n = 69) reported clinically significant decision conflict (score ≥ 37.5), and an additional 36.63% (n = 63) reported scores between 25 and 37.5, indicating a tendency toward decisional delay. Multiple linear regression analysis identified the educational level of FDRs and prior liver cancer screening experience as significant determinants. Higher decision conflict scores were associated with lower decision preparation (β = − 0.562, P < 0.001), lower social support (β = − 0.580, P < 0.001), and lower health literacy management (β = − 0.232, P = 0.023). The model accounted for 71.6% of the total variance.
Conclusion: FDRs of liver cancer patients experience moderate decision conflict regarding liver cancer screening. To address this issue, the development of structured decision aids incorporating liver cancer screening education and clear risk-benefit information is recommended. Interventions should prioritize enhancing patients’ understanding and preparedness for decision making, particularly among individuals with lower educational attainment or no prior screening experience.
Keywords: liver cancer, first-degree relatives, FDRs, liver cancer screening, decision conflict, factor analysis