Document Type : Original Article


1 School of Natural and Health Sciences, Seton Hill University, Greensburg, Pennsylvania, USA

2 Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Kanchrapara College, University of Kalyani, Kalyani, West Bengal, India

3 Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, University of Kalyani, Kalyani, West Bengal, India


BACKGROUND: Cancer is one of the leading causes of death globally. A considerable number of
different cancer types may be preventable, using primary intervention techniques, such as health
education, cancer awareness, behaviors and lifestyle modifications. The present study conducted a
comparative assessment of cancer awareness among undergraduate students of the United States
and India.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Students from an Institution in India (KC) (55 females, 33 males),
and an Institution in the United States of America (SHU) (226 female, 58 male) during 2019–2020
participated in this study. Participants (n = 372) across all majors and all years (first through
fourth year) completed an online questionnaire and answered the questions on their demographic
characteristics (e.g., gender, age, and location), academic status (e.g., year of study, major),
multiple‑choice questions about cancer knowledge, and opinion questions (e.g., “where would you
find info,” “should therapies be free”). Student responses were collected using Qualtrics Survey
Software. Excel was used to analyze responses. We conducted statistical Χ2
 tests for independence
to determine whether there is a statistically significant difference between the expected frequencies
and the observed frequencies in one or more categories of a contingency table, with a significance
of ɑ = 0.01. While small sizes due to the small institutions and the response pool, we note that we
achieved the necessary “n” for all tests reported.
RESULTS: Our research shows a few important statistically significant differences, including
knowledge of cancer and breast lumps is dependent on location, ranking of global cancer deaths is
dependent on location, and that cancer knowledge is dependent on the information source. All for
 tests with P < 0.001.
CONCLUSIONS: Further encouragement of education for young people in various aspects of
cancer and cancer prevention, as well as information facility and sources of reliable data, could be
helpful for improving the overall health and primary prevention. A thorough assessment is needed
to understand the responsible factors for the observed cancer knowledge variations among students
of two different places.


1. Girschik J, Miller LJ, Addiscott T, Daube M, Katris P, Ransom D,
et al. Precision in setting cancer prevention priorities: Synthesis
of data, literature, and expert opinion. Front Public Health
2. Biro FM, Deardorff J. Identifying opportunities for cancer
prevention during preadolescence and adolescence: Puberty as
a window of susceptibility. J Adolesc Health 2013;52:S15‑20.
3. Holman DM, White MC, Shoemaker ML, Massetti GM,
Puckett MC, Brindis CD, et al. Cancer prevention during early
adulthood: Highlights from a meeting of experts. Am J Prev Med
4. Colditz GA, Wei EK. Preventability of cancer: The
relative contributions of biologic and social and physical
environmental determinants of cancer mortality. Annu
Rev Public Health 2012;33:137‑56.
5. White MC, Peipins LA, Watson M, Trivers KF, Holman DM,
Rodriguez JL. Cancer prevention for the next generation. J Adolesc
Health 2013;52:S1‑7.
6. Sarkar U, Le GM, Lyles CR, Ramo D, Linos E, Bibbins‑Domingo K.
Using social media to target cancer prevention in young adults:
Viewpoint. J Med Internet Res 2018;20:e203.
7. Gapstur SM, Drope JM, Jacobs EJ, Teras LR, McCullough ML,
Douglas CE, et al. A blueprint for the primary prevention of
cancer: Targeting established, modifiable risk factors. CA Cancer
J Clin 2018;68:446‑70.
8. Lewandowska A, Filip R. Knowledge on neoplastic diseases
among young rural inhabitants. Ann Agric Environ Med
9. Colditz GA, Wolin KY, Gehlert S. Applying what we know to
accelerate cancer prevention. Sci Transl Med 2012;4:127rv4.
10. Spring B, King AC, Pagoto SL, Van Horn L, Fisher JD. Fostering
multiple healthy lifestyle behaviors for primary prevention of
cancer. Am Psychol 2015;70:75‑90.
11. Lewandowska AM, Lewandowski T, Rudzki M, Rudzki S,
Laskowska B. Cancer prevention‑review paper. Ann Agric
Environ Med 2021;28:11‑9.
12. Duffy FD, Miller‑Cribbs JE, Clancy GP, Van De Wiele CJ,
Teague TK, Crow S, et al. Changing the culture of a medical school
by orienting students and faculty toward community medicine.
Acad Med 2014;89:1630‑5.
13. Merten JW, Parker A, Williams A, King JL, Largo‑Wight E,
Osmani M. Cancer risk factor knowledge among young adults.
J Cancer Educ 2017;32:865‑70.
14. Blackburn H. Invited commentary: 30‑year perspective on the
Seven Countries Study. Am J Epidemiol 2017;185:1143‑7.
15. Ek S. Gender differences in health information behaviour:
A Finnish population‑based survey. Health Promot Int
16. Bidmon S, Terlutter R. Gender differences in searching for health
information on the internet and the virtual patient‑physician
relationship in Germany: Exploratory results on how men and
women differ and why. J Med Internet Res 2015;17:e156.
17. Mahalik JR, Backus Dagirmanjian FR. Working men’s
constructions of visiting the doctor. Am J Mens Health
18. Singh M, Prasad CP, Singh TD, Kumar L. Cancer research in India:
Challenges & opportunities. Indian J Med Res 2018;148:362‑5.