Communicating Cancer Prevention: Comparative Effects of Four Educational Materials on Prevention Beliefs, Information Overload, and Intentions
- 1Division of Physical Activity, Cancer Prevention and Survivorship, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- 2Medical Faculty, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
- 3Section of Health Care Research and Rehabilitation Research, Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Abstract
Introduction: Public awareness of modifiable cancer risk factors remains limited, and fatalistic prevention beliefs and cancer information overload may hinder information seeking and engagement in preventive behaviors. Brief communication interventions may help address these barriers, but evidence comparing different communication strategies in cancer prevention remains scarce. This randomized study evaluated the effects of four theory-based intervention materials on cancer prevention beliefs, cancer information overload, and prevention-related intentions.
Methods: In a population-based online study, 1,191 adults from Stuttgart, Germany, were randomly assigned to one of four intervention conditions that varied by presentation modality (audiovisual animation vs. text) and mode (narrative vs. non-narrative) or to a control condition. Interventions were self-developed based on the Protection Motivation Theory, addressing modifiable cancer prevention behaviors, particularly physical activity and healthy diet. Cancer prevention beliefs and cancer information overload were assessed pre- and post-intervention using items from the Health Information National Trends Survey; behavioral intentions were assessed post-intervention. Baseline-adjusted ANCOVAs and robust linear models were used.
Results: Audiovisual and narrative materials showed small advantages over text-based and non-narrative materials for the belief that cancer risk can be reduced (F(1,892)=7.33, p=.007, ηp 2 =.007; F(1,892)=6.71, p=.010, ηp2=.005, respectively). Narrative materials were associated with comparatively higher perceived cancer information overload than non-narrative materials (F(1,856)=11.90, p<.001, ηp2=.02). Compared with the control condition, all four intervention conditions were associated with stronger behavioral intentions (all p ≤ .009), with no significant differences between the intervention conditions.
Conclusion: Brief theory-based cancer prevention materials can positively influence prevention-related beliefs, perceived information overload, and behavioral intentions. The findings suggest a trade-off in cancer prevention communication: audiovisual and narrative materials showed advantages in strengthening prevention-related beliefs, whereas non-narrative materials were associated with lower perceived cancer information overload. All intervention conditions were associated with stronger intentions, highlighting the potential of diverse theory-based communication strategies to promote cancer-preventive behaviors.
Related
- Communicating Ethically Relevant Practices of Patient Registries: An Interview Study on the Information Needs of People with Multiple Sclerosis
- Feasibility and immediate effects of a multimodal, dance-integrated educational video package on eye health knowledge and intentions in Nigeria: A pre-post pilot study
- Determinants of cancer screening intentions among UAE residents: an exploratory model with application of the information-motivation-behavioral skills model
- Emerging information technologies across the autism service and prevention continuum: a narrative review of screening, diagnosis, intervention, and health equity
- Percutaneous nephrolithotomy on YouTube: Valuable educational resource for urologists and patients or misleading information?
BibTeX
@article{illmann2026communicating,
title = {{Communicating Cancer Prevention: Comparative Effects of Four Educational Materials on Prevention Beliefs, Information Overload, and Intentions}},
author = {Mona Illmann and Florian Herbolsheimer and Alexander Haussmann and Karen Steindorf},
journal = {Cancer Control: Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1177/10732748261493130},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748261493130},
note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Communicating Cancer Prevention: Comparative Effects of Four Educational Materials on Prevention Beliefs, Information Overload, and Intentions
AU - Mona Illmann
AU - Florian Herbolsheimer
AU - Alexander Haussmann
AU - Karen Steindorf
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - Cancer Control: Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
DO - 10.1177/10732748261493130
UR - https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748261493130
AB - Introduction: Public awareness of modifiable cancer risk factors remains limited, and fatalistic prevention beliefs and cancer information overload may hinder information seeking and engagement in preventive behaviors. Brief communication interventions may help address these barriers, but evidence comparing different communication strategies in cancer prevention remains scarce. This randomized study evaluated the effects of four theory-based intervention materials on cancer prevention beliefs, cancer information overload, and prevention-related intentions. Methods: In a population-based online study, 1,191 adults from Stuttgart, Germany, were randomly assigned to one of four intervention conditions that varied by presentation modality (audiovisual animation vs. text) and mode (narrative vs. non-narrative) or to a control condition. Interventions were self-developed based on the Protection Motivation Theory, addressing modifiable cancer prevention behaviors, particularly physical activity and healthy diet. Cancer prevention beliefs and cancer information overload were assessed pre- and post-intervention using items from the Health Information National Trends Survey; behavioral intentions were assessed post-intervention. Baseline-adjusted ANCOVAs and robust linear models were used. Results: Audiovisual and narrative materials showed small advantages over text-based and non-narrative materials for the belief that cancer risk can be reduced (F(1,892)=7.33, p=.007, ηp 2 =.007; F(1,892)=6.71, p=.010, ηp2=.005, respectively). Narrative materials were associated with comparatively higher perceived cancer information overload than non-narrative materials (F(1,856)=11.90, p<.001, ηp2=.02). Compared with the control condition, all four intervention conditions were associated with stronger behavioral intentions (all p ≤ .009), with no significant differences between the intervention conditions. Conclusion: Brief theory-based cancer prevention materials can positively influence prevention-related beliefs, perceived information overload, and behavioral intentions. The findings suggest a trade-off in cancer prevention communication: audiovisual and narrative materials showed advantages in strengthening prevention-related beliefs, whereas non-narrative materials were associated with lower perceived cancer information overload. All intervention conditions were associated with stronger intentions, highlighting the potential of diverse theory-based communication strategies to promote cancer-preventive behaviors.
SN - 1073-2748
SN - 1526-2359
ER -