Background: Evidence-based information materials about the pros and cons of cancer screening are important sources for men and women to decide for or against cancer screening.
Objectives: The aim of this paper was to compare recommendations from different cancer institutions in German-speaking countries (Austria, Germany, and Switzerland) regarding screening for breast, cervix, colon, and prostate cancers and to assess the quality and development process of patient information materials.
Methods: We identified relevant information materials through web-searches and personal contact with cancer institutions. To achieve our objective, we employed a qualitative approach. We analysed the quality of 22 patient information materials based on established guidance by Bunge et al. In addition, we conducted guided interviews about the process of developing information materials with decision makers from the cancer institutes.
Results: Overall, major discrepancies in cancer screening recommendations exist among the Austrian, German, and Swiss cancer institutes. Process evaluation revealed that crucial steps for quality assurance such as assembling a multidisciplinary panel, assessing conflicts of interest, or transparency regarding funding sources frequently are not fulfilled. All information materials had substantial deficits in multiple areas; inded for three out of four institutes, information materials did not even fulfill half of the quality criteria.
Conclusions: Most patient information materials of cancer institutes in German speaking countries are fraught with substantial deficits and do not provide an objective source for patients to be able to make an informed decision for or against cancer screening.