Evidence mapPaperPMID 42422697Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2026

Re-validation of the Cancer Research UK Cancer Awareness Measure 'plus' (CAM+): a study protocol.

Maja Nikšić, Kate Hamilton-West, Lindsay J L Forbes, Kirstie Osborne, Leia Brasnell, Sabina Hulbert, Kate Day, Victoria Whitelock, Sarah Hotham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Maja NikšićCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Kate Hamilton-WestCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Lindsay J L ForbesCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Kirstie OsborneHealth Policy and Evidence Department, Cancer Research UK, London, United Kingdom.
Leia BrasnellCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Sabina HulbertCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Kate DayCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Victoria WhitelockHealth Policy and Evidence Department, Cancer Research UK, London, United Kingdom.
Sarah HothamCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Cancer Research UK Cancer Awareness Measure (CRUK CAM) was introduced in 2008 as the first psychometrically validated survey of public attitudes, awareness and behaviours across cancer prevention, screening and early diagnosis. CRUK regularly collects CAM data in the UK to inform strategic planning. The measure has been modified over time in response to changes in the research, policy and practice landscape. Our aim is to revalidate the most recent CAM 'Plus' (CAM+) to ensure the measure remains accurate, reliable, valid, and relevant over time. Methods: There will be four phases, running from 2023 to 2026, with the CAM + being revised after each phase. Phase 1 will start by auditing the CAM + against a behaviour change framework, i.e., the COM-B, postulating that to engage in a Behaviour (B), a person must have the Capability (C) and Opportunity (O) to exhibit that behaviour, as well as the Motivation (M) to demonstrate it at a specific moment. This phase will also include (a) scoping literature reviews; (b) a face validity assessment, to check CRUK and scientific evidence needs and identify gaps in the survey; and, (c) a readability assessment using the Hemingway App to check for long complex sentences. Phase 2 will focus on content validity, using two stages of cognitive interviews with members of the public to assess comprehension and clarity. The first stage will use a 'Think Aloud' methodology to identify potential problem areas; while the second stage will use the four-stage model of cognitive interviewing to understand how people comprehend, retrieve, judge, and respond to questions. In Phase 3, we will conduct exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to inform further refinements to the measure. In Phase 4, we will assess: (a) construct validity, by comparing responses of cancer experts and non-cancer experts; (b) reliability, using the test-retest approach; and (c) responsiveness, using sensitivity to change to questions in CAM+, following a brief intervention. Throughout the revalidation process we will be adhering to the standards set out in the COSMIN guidelines.

Indexed as

AwarenessHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeNeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdomcancer awarenessearly diagnosisearly prevention behaviourquestionnairevalidation

Identifiers

PMID42422697
PMCPMC13341668

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.