Affect and cognition measures in preference-based decisions: Validity testing of the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale and a decision-specific anxiety measure with men eligible for prostate cancer screening

Background. At present, prostate cancer screening (PCS) guidelines require a discussion of risks, benefits, alternatives, and personal values, making decision aids an important tool to help convey information and to help clarify values. Objective: The overall goal of this study is to provide evidence of the reliability and validity of a PCS anxiety measure and the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Methods. Using data from a randomized, controlled PCS decision aid trial that measured PCS anxiety at baseline and DCS at baseline (T0) and at two-weeks (T2), four psychometric properties were assessed: (1) internal consistency reliability, indicated by factor analysis intraclass correlations and Cronbach's α; (2) construct validity, indicated by patterns of Pearson correlations among subscales; (3) discriminant validity, indicated by the measure's ability to discriminate between undecided men and those with a definite screening intention; and (4) factor validity and invariance using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA). Results. The PCS anxiety measure had adequate internal consistency reliability and good construct and discriminant validity. CFAs indicated that the 3-factor model did not have adequate fit. CFAs for a general PCS anxiety measure and a PSA anxiety measure indicated adequate fit. The general PCS anxiety measure was invariant across clinics. The DCS had adequate internal consistency reliability except for the support subscale and had adequate discriminate validity. Good construct validity was found at the private clinic, but was only found for the feeling informed subscale at the public clinic. The traditional DCS did not have adequate fit at T0 or at T2. The alternative DCS had adequate fit at T0 but was not identified at T2. Factor loadings indicated that two subscales, feeling informed and feeling clear about values, were not distinct factors. Conclusions. Our general PCS anxiety measure can be used in PCS decision aid studies. The alternative DCS may be appropriate for men eligible for PCS. Implications: More emphasis needs to be placed on the development of PCS anxiety items relating to testing procedures. We recommend that the two DCS versions be validated in other samples of men eligible for PCS and in other health care decisions that involve uncertainty. ^

Genetic susceptibility, cigarette smoking, and wood dust exposure in lung cancer: Case control analyses

This case control study was conducted to assess the association between lung cancer risk, mutagen sensitivity (a marker of cancer susceptibility), and a putative lung carcinogen, wood dust exposure. There were 165 cases (98 African-Americans, 67 Mexican-Americans) with newly diagnosed, previously untreated lung cancer, and 239 controls, frequency-matched on age, sex, and ethnicity.^ Mutagen sensitivity ($\ge$1 break/cell) was associated with a statistically significant elevated risk for lung cancer (odds ratio (OR) = 4.1, 95% confidence limits (CL) = 2.3,7.2). Wood dust exposure was also a significant predictor of risk (OR = 2.8, 95% CL = 1.2,6.6) after controlling for smoking and mutagen sensitivity. When stratified by ethnicity, wood dust exposure was a significant risk factor for African-Americans (OR = 4.0, 95% CL = 1.4,11.5), but not for Mexican-Americans (OR = 1.5, 95% CL = 0.3,7.1). Stratified analysis suggested a greater than multiplicative interaction between wood dust exposure and both mutagen sensitivity and smoking.^ The cases had significantly more breaks on chromosomes 4 and 5 than the controls did with ORs of 4.9 (95% CL = 2.0, 11.7) and 3.9 (95% CL = 1.6, 9.3), respectively. Breaks at 4p14, 4q27, 4q31, 5q21-22, 5q31, and 5q33 were significantly more common in lung cancer patients than in controls. Lung cancer risk had a dose-response relationship with breaks on chromosomes 4 and 5. Cigarette smoking had a strong interaction with breaks on chromosomes 2, 4, and 5.^ In a molecular cytogenetic study, using chromosome painting and G-banding, we showed that: (1) the proportion of chromosome 5 abnormalities surviving as chromosome-type aberrations remained significantly higher in cells of lung cancer cases (14%) than in controls (5%) (P $<$ 0.001). However, no significant differences were detected in chromosome 4 abnormalities between cases and controls; (2) the proportion of chromosome 5q13-22 abnormalities was 5.3% in the cases and 0.7% in the controls (P $<$ 0.001). 5q13-22 regions represented 40% of all abnormalities on chromosome 5 in the cases and only 14% in the controls.^ This study suggests that mutagen sensitivity, wood dust exposure, and cigarette smoking were independent risk factors for lung cancer, and the susceptibility of particular chromosome loci to mutagenic damage may be a genetic marker for specific types of lung cancer. ^