Rebecca A Dennison
Biographic Data
| ID | 7744893 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Rebecca A Dennison |
| GIVEN NAMES | Rebecca A |
| FAMILY NAME | Dennison |
| SIGNATURE | DENNISON R A |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Cambridge |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-0847-0723 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 8 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 0 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 8 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2018 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 0 |
Assessing the Quality of Community Jury Deliberations in Online and In‐Person Community Juries Using a Deductive Coding Framework
INTRODUCTION: Community juries require participants to engage in group deliberations, seeking to reach a consensus or verdict on the research question(s). Community juries have traditionally taken place in-person, although holding them online or in a hybrid format is increasingly common, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic. In order for the community jury method to be used successfully, it is crucial to ensure that the goals of the delib…
Societal views on using risk-based innovations to inform cancer screening and referral policies: Findings from three community juries
Informed members of the public supported the concept of using innovations to estimate cancer risk and inform healthcare. Their priorities for accuracy, data security, participation burden, and personal liberty and choice tended to overlap with those of developers and policymakers. Work to ready these innovations for implementation should continue, with the public's priorities accounted for in their development and dissemination in order to addres…
Understanding the Preferences and Considerations of the Public Towards Risk‐Stratified Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Insights From Think‐Aloud Interviews Based on a Discrete Choice Experiment
CONTEXT: Risk stratification has been suggested as a strategy for improving cancer screening. Any changes to existing programmes must be acceptable to the public. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the preferences and considerations of individuals relating to the introduction of different risk-based strategies to determine eligibility for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. STUDY DESIGN: Participants completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE…
Acceptability of risk stratification within population‐based cancer screening from the perspective of the general public: A mixed‐methods systematic review
Implementation of risk stratification within bowel cancer screening: A community jury study exploring public acceptability and communication needs
From the perspective of public acceptability, risk stratification using current data could be implemented immediately, ahead of more complex strategies. Collecting additional data for lifestyle and/or genetic risk assessment was also considered acceptable but the practicalities of collecting such data and how the programme would be communicated require careful consideration
A community jury study exploring the public acceptability of using risk stratification to determine eligibility for cancer screening
INTRODUCTION: Using risk stratification to determine eligibility for cancer screening is likely to improve the efficiency of screening programmes by targeting resources towards those most likely to benefit. We aimed to explore the implications of this approach from a societal perspective by understanding public views on the most acceptable stratification strategies. METHODS: We conducted three online community juries with 9 or 10 participants in …
Developing training and opportunities for students in systematic reviews
Systematic reviews are a key component of evidence-based healthcare. Being able to conduct a systematic review is a core skill for clinical researchers and the ability to find and appraise evidence is important for all clinicians. While elements of the systematic review process are often included in medical school curricula, we believe that there is scope for additional bespoke training
The association between psychosocial factors and change in lifestyle behaviour following lifestyle advice and information about cardiovascular disease risk
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17721237 . Registered 12 January 2015
No prominent works on this page.
The association between psychosocial factors and change in lifestyle behaviour following lifestyle advice and information about cardiovascular disease risk
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17721237 . Registered 12 January 2015
Developing training and opportunities for students in systematic reviews
Systematic reviews are a key component of evidence-based healthcare. Being able to conduct a systematic review is a core skill for clinical researchers and the ability to find and appraise evidence is important for all clinicians. While elements of the systematic review process are often included in medical school curricula, we believe that there is scope for additional bespoke training
A community jury study exploring the public acceptability of using risk stratification to determine eligibility for cancer screening
INTRODUCTION: Using risk stratification to determine eligibility for cancer screening is likely to improve the efficiency of screening programmes by targeting resources towards those most likely to benefit. We aimed to explore the implications of this approach from a societal perspective by understanding public views on the most acceptable stratification strategies. METHODS: We conducted three online community juries with 9 or 10 participants in …
Acceptability of risk stratification within population‐based cancer screening from the perspective of the general public: A mixed‐methods systematic review
Implementation of risk stratification within bowel cancer screening: A community jury study exploring public acceptability and communication needs
From the perspective of public acceptability, risk stratification using current data could be implemented immediately, ahead of more complex strategies. Collecting additional data for lifestyle and/or genetic risk assessment was also considered acceptable but the practicalities of collecting such data and how the programme would be communicated require careful consideration
Understanding the Preferences and Considerations of the Public Towards Risk‐Stratified Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Insights From Think‐Aloud Interviews Based on a Discrete Choice Experiment
CONTEXT: Risk stratification has been suggested as a strategy for improving cancer screening. Any changes to existing programmes must be acceptable to the public. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the preferences and considerations of individuals relating to the introduction of different risk-based strategies to determine eligibility for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. STUDY DESIGN: Participants completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE…
Assessing the Quality of Community Jury Deliberations in Online and In‐Person Community Juries Using a Deductive Coding Framework
INTRODUCTION: Community juries require participants to engage in group deliberations, seeking to reach a consensus or verdict on the research question(s). Community juries have traditionally taken place in-person, although holding them online or in a hybrid format is increasingly common, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic. In order for the community jury method to be used successfully, it is crucial to ensure that the goals of the delib…
Societal views on using risk-based innovations to inform cancer screening and referral policies: Findings from three community juries
Informed members of the public supported the concept of using innovations to estimate cancer risk and inform healthcare. Their priorities for accuracy, data security, participation burden, and personal liberty and choice tended to overlap with those of developers and policymakers. Work to ready these innovations for implementation should continue, with the public's priorities accounted for in their development and dissemination in order to addres…
Medicine (6 works) · Global Cancer Incidence and Screening (4 works) · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (3 works) · Computer Science (3 works) · Psychology (3 works) · Qualitative research (3 works) · Sociology (3 works) · Thematic analysis (3 works) · Biostatistics (2 works) · BRCA gene mutations in cancer (2 works)