Table 1.
Demographics of tech-trusters and tech-skeptics.*
|
Tech-trusters, n (%) |
Tech-skeptics, n (%) |
Women in Stockholm, aged 40–74 years†, n (%) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n = 839, average 61 years | n = 1357, average 61 years | n = 468,590, average 57 years | |||
| Age (years) ‡ | |||||
| 40–54 | 174 (21) | 270 (20) | 160,229 (34) | ||
| 55–64 | 210 (24) | 343 (25) | 198,898 (43) | ||
| 65–74 | 358 (43) | 565 (42) | P = 0.9 | 109,463 (24) | P < 0.005 |
| Living situation ‡ | |||||
| Alone | 213 (25) | 358 (25) | 120,947 (26) | ||
| With partner/cohabiting | 610 (73) | 970 (73) | P = 0.6 | 347,641 (74) | P = 0.8 |
| Education | |||||
| Low (≤12 years) | 265 (32) | 543 (40) | 232,791 (50) | ||
| High (>12 years) | 572 (68) | 804 (59) | P < 0.005 | 229,858 (50) | P < 0.005 |
| Occupation ‡ | |||||
| Working | 478 (57) | 752 (55) | |||
| Retired | 341 (41) | 559 (41) | |||
| Unemployed | 8 (1) | 19 (1) | P = 0.6 | ||
| Income ‡ | |||||
| Low (<330,000 SEK) | 335 (40) | 610 (45) | |||
| High (≥330,000 SEK) | 498 (59) | 723 (53) | P = 0.09 | ||
| Medical history | |||||
| Previous cancer | 80 (10) | 160 (12) | |||
| Previous breast cancer | 33 (4) | 65 (5) | |||
| No previous cancer | 756 (90) | 1191 (88) | P = 0.13 | ||
| First degree family history of cancer | 153 (18) | 270 (20) | |||
| No declared family history of cancer | 684 (82) | 1079 (80) | P = 0.3 | ||
| Chronic disease | 260 (31) | 484 (36) | 50%§ | ||
| No chronic disease | 579 (69) | 873 (64) | P = 0.02 | ||
P values directly to the right of columns Tech-trusters and Tech-skeptics are from χ2 tests between the distributions of these groups. The P values in the right-most column correspond to χ2 tests between the columns Tech-trusters, Tech-skeptics, and Women in Stockholm.
*Respondents split into tech-trusters and tech-skeptics based on answers to Q8: Given the computer is at least as good as the average physician, what would you prefer?
†Statistics from Statistics Sweden (www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se).
‡Percentages are related to the total number of respondents. These do not always add up to 100%. This is caused by rounding and missing responses. In particular, 50 participants did not answer the question of age and 25 participants reported an age > 74 years.
§An estimated prevalence of at least 50% based on this age group and available data (14).