Table 2.
Details of the risk-based interventions in each of the included studies
| Author, year | Risk tool | Intervention group(s) | Comparison (where applicable) | Format of risk |
| Bodurtha et al, 31 2009 | Gail model (5 year and lifetime) | Information sheets with risk level and handouts addressing traditional constructs of Health Belief Model including barriers to mammography, breast cancer seriousness, individual risk for breast cancer and benefits of yearly mammography | General information about breast cancer prevention practices, including mammography | Usual (<15%), moderate (15%–30%) or strong (>30%) |
| Bowen et al, 41 2006 | Gail model (5 year, 10 year and at age 79) | Four weekly 2-hour sessions led by a health counsellor focusing on risk assessment and education, screening, stress management and social support | Delayed intervention | No details given |
| Bowen and Powers,42 2010 | Gail model (lifetime) | Information sheets with general information on breast cancer risk and personalised risk information plus telephone counselling and offer for more intensive group or genetic counselling | Delayed intervention | Bar graph of absolute lifetime risk along with age-appropriate estimates for the ‘average risk’ woman |
| Davis et al, 34 2004 | BCRA tool (updated version of Gail model) (lifetime) | 10 min brief intervention designed to increase accuracy of perceived risk including results of risk assessment and screening recommendations tailored to participant’s stage of adoption of mammography and follow-up written information | No intervention | Verbal over the telephone. No additional details given |
| Glanz et al, 45 2013 | Children’s BRAT | Three mailings with personalised risk feedback, interactive skin cancer education materials, a family fun guide and suggestions for overcoming barriers and reminders to engage in preventive practices | Single mailing of standardised skin cancer information | No details given |
| Glazebrook et al,22 2006 | No details given | Self-directed computer program including sections on skin protection, how to detect melanoma, dangers of sun exposure, how to check skin, how to reduce risk and individualised feedback of risk | Usual care | Comparative risk |
| Greene and Brinn,44 2003 | Relative risk adapted from ‘ADD Wants to Convert’ | Self-assessment of risk alongside generic messages about tanning, tanning beds and sun exposure | Generic messages about tanning, tanning beds and sun exposure | Numerical scale from 1 to 36 |
| Helmes et al, 35 2006 | Gail model (lifetime) | Face-to-face or telephone intervention consisting of 8 items: (1) a personal risk sheet, (2) a personal computer-drawn pedigree, (3) a 23-page participant booklet, (4) breast self-examination (BSE) brochure, (5) pap smear and mammography brochure, (6) BSE shower card, (7) pictures of chromosomes and gene mutations and (8) a list of community resources for breast cancer | No intervention | Bar charts of absolute % risk with numerical % alongside for the individual, an average-risk woman and a high-risk woman |
| Holloway et al, 21 2003 | Wilkinson score | Brief 10 min counselling session integrated with smear test appointment including relative and absolute risks and then negotiation of appropriate screening intervals | Usual care | Comparative and absolute risk in pictures and numbers |
| Lipkus and Klein,30 2006 | Not given | Written information about CRC, CRC screening methods and CRC risk factors plus either (1) tailored CRC risk factor information or (2) tailored CRC risk factor information plus information on whether their total number of CRC risk factors was greater or not than average | Written information about CRC, CRC screening methods and CRC risk factors | Narrative comparative risk |
| Lipkus et al, 38 2001 | Gail model (10 year) | One-page handout describing the Gail model plus absolute risk alone | As for intervention group plus how their risk compared with a woman of their age and race at the lowest level of risk | Absolute risk±risk of a woman at the lowest level of risk as percentages in a pie chart |
| Rimer et al, 40 2002 | Gail model (10 year and lifetime) | Tailored print booklet and brief tailored newspaper plus personalised risk | Usual care (postcard reminder) | Absolute risk as a percentage |
| Rubinstein et al,39 2012 | Family Healthware tool | Written personalised risk assessment and tailored prevention messages | Written generalised prevention messages | Qualitative risk—weak, moderate or strong familial risk |
| Schroy et al,36 2011 | Harvard cancer risk model (10 year) | Interactive 20–30 min computer-based decision aid plus personalised risk assessment | Interactive 20–30 min computer-based decision aid alone | Thermograph, indicating where the participant is along with a description, for example, your risk is below average |
| Schroy et al, 32 2012 | Harvard cancer risk model (10 year) | Interactive 20–30 min computer-based decision aid plus personalised risk assessment followed immediately by a meeting with their providers to discuss screening and identify a preferred screening strategy. Providers received written notification hand-delivered by all the patients acknowledging that they were participating in the ‘CRC decision aid study’ at the time of the visit to ensure that screening was discussed | As for intervention but without personalised risk assessment | Qualitative framing (‘very much below average risk’ to ‘very much above average risk’) with accompanying suggestions for behaviour modifications that might reduce risk, including a strong recommendation for screening, regardless of risk |
| Seitz et al, 37 2016 | Gail model (10 year) | Online risk plus basic information about mammography and national recommendations plus either (1) statements about women making choices, (2) untailored examples of women making choices or (3) examples of similar women making choices | No information or the same basic information as intervention group | Absolute risk and risk of an average risk age-matched women as numeric frequencies and icon arrays |
| Sequist et al, 43 2011 | Harvard cancer risk model (10 year) | Personalised electronic message highlighting their overdue screening status and providing a link to a web-based tool to assess their risk | No contact | Comparative risk on seven-point ordinal scale from very much below average to very much above average and in interactive graphical format |
| Sherratt et al, 23 2016 | Liverpool Lung Project model (5 year at age 70) | Personalised risk plus booklet stating the association between smoking and lung cancer and highlighting that quitting smoking was the best thing to do | As for intervention but without personalised risk assessment | Verbal and written absolute risk if continue to smoke and if stop smoking alongside icon arrays |
| Trevena et al, 33 2008 | No details given | 20-page booklet including personalised risk, absolute reduction in CRC mortality with screening over the next 10 years, probability of test outcomes from screening and information about how to get screened. | Three-page booklet with information and recommendations about screening | Words and 1000-face diagrams |
AAD, American Association of Dermatology; BCRA, Breast Cancer Risk Assessment; BRAT, Brief Skin Cancer Risk Assessment Tool; CRC, colorectal cancer.