Defensiveness in Cancer Screening and Prevention: A Scoping Review of Definitions, Measures and Profiles

<ns3:p>Introduction Organised population-based cancer screening invites identified populations to undergo a test, usually at regular intervals, to detect early-stage cancers or pre-cancerous lesions, to reduce cancer-specific mortality rates, and, in some cases, cancer-specific incidence. Emerging research highlights the role of cognitive processing, especially Defensive Information Processing (DIP), in influencing screening participation. This scoping review aims to 1) shed light on how Defensive Information Processing is defined and measured in cancer screening studies, 2) provide an overview of the use of theories and conceptual frameworks in such studies,3) describe defensive information processing profiles and outcomes, and 4) describe intervention strategies aimed at reducing defensiveness reactions to cancer screening. Methods This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines and will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Inclusion/exclusion criteria and search strategy will be developed using the Population, Context, Concept (PCC) framework. Relevant studies will be retrieved via 6 databases (Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO and CENTRAL). Quantitative studies of cancer screening will be included if they report original research that defines, measures, and/or intervenes on any aspect of defensive information processing, consistent with the conceptualisations by McQueen et al (attention avoidance, blunting, suppression, and counterarguing). Two reviewers will independently screen published abstracts, full-text articles, and extract data from the final included studies using a standardised extraction form. Extracted data will be reported using narrative synthesis. Conclusion This scoping review will be the first to examine the range of literature on all or some domains of defensive information processing in cancer screening contexts since McQueen et al.’s conceptual model. By reviewing research beyond their work, it aims to provide an evidence base to inform future interventions addressing defensiveness in cancer screening.</ns3:p>

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
HRB Open Research
Published
2026-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.14328.1
Primary Topic
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Defensiveness in Cancer Screening and Prevention: A Scoping Review of Definitions, Measures and Profiles

P Gallagher, Amy McQueen, Thérèse Mooney, Nick Clarke et al.
HRB Open Research
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
article

Defensiveness in Cancer Screening and Prevention: A Scoping Review of Definitions, Measures and Profiles

P Gallagher, Amy McQueen, Thérèse Mooney, Nick Clarke, Rana Ahmed, Uyen Ngo, Christian Von Wagner, Linda Sharp
article en

Abstract

<ns3:p>Introduction Organised population-based cancer screening invites identified populations to undergo a test, usually at regular intervals, to detect early-stage cancers or pre-cancerous lesions, to reduce cancer-specific mortality rates, and, in some cases, cancer-specific incidence. Emerging research highlights the role of cognitive processing, especially Defensive Information Processing (DIP), in influencing screening participation. This scoping review aims to 1) shed light on how Defensive Information Processing is defined and measured in cancer screening studies, 2) provide an overview of the use of theories and conceptual frameworks in such studies,3) describe defensive information processing profiles and outcomes, and 4) describe intervention strategies aimed at reducing defensiveness reactions to cancer screening. Methods This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines and will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Inclusion/exclusion criteria and search strategy will be developed using the Population, Context, Concept (PCC) framework. Relevant studies will be retrieved via 6 databases (Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO and CENTRAL). Quantitative studies of cancer screening will be included if they report original research that defines, measures, and/or intervenes on any aspect of defensive information processing, consistent with the conceptualisations by McQueen et al (attention avoidance, blunting, suppression, and counterarguing). Two reviewers will independently screen published abstracts, full-text articles, and extract data from the final included studies using a standardised extraction form. Extracted data will be reported using narrative synthesis. Conclusion This scoping review will be the first to examine the range of literature on all or some domains of defensive information processing in cancer screening contexts since McQueen et al.’s conceptual model. By reviewing research beyond their work, it aims to provide an evidence base to inform future interventions addressing defensiveness in cancer screening.</ns3:p>

HRB Open ResearchVol. 9
Washington University in St. Louis (US), Centre de recherche en Epidémiologie et Santé des Populations (FR), National Center for Drug Screening (CN), NIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre (GB), The Behaviouralist (United Kingdom) (GB), Dublin City University (IE), University College London (GB), Newcastle University (GB)
Health Research Board
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.