ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2005
Breast self-examination: resistance to change.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women aged 40-74 years.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2011Guideline
- 'If I feel something wrong, then I will get a mammogram': understanding barriers and facilitators for mammography screening among Chilean women.Family practice · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate whether Canadian family practitioners routinely teach breast self-examination (BSE) after publication of the 2001 Canadian Preventive Health Task Force guideline advising them to exclude teaching BSE from periodic health examinations.
designSelf-administered cross-sectional mailed survey.
settingCanada.
participantsA random sample of English-speaking general practitioners and physicians certified by the College of Family Physicians of Canada.
main outcome measuresCurrent and past BSE practices and opinions on the value of BSE.
resultsResponse rate was 47.4%. Most respondents (88%) were aware of the new recommendations, yet only 16% had changed their usual practice of routinely teaching BSE. Most physicians agreed that before the recommendation they almost always taught BSE (74.3%). Only 9.5% agreed that physicians should follow the recommendation and not routinely teach BSE. A few also agreed that they now spend less time discussing BSE (25.7%) and that the recommendation has influenced them to stop teaching (12.4%) and encouraging (12.9%) women to practise BSE. Physicians who had changed their BSE practices were less likely to agree that BSE increases early detection of breast cancer and more likely to agree that BSE increases benign breast biopsies. They were also more likely to agree that screening mammography in women older than 50 decreases mortality from breast cancer.
conclusionThis survey, which assessed routine teaching of BSE, revealed poor adherence by Canadian family physicians to a well publicized evidence-based guideline update. Resistance to change could in part be attributed to a lack of knowledge of the supporting evidence, a lack of confidence in the evidence to date, and personal experiences with patients within their practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16926925PMC1472923What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.