ArticleJournal of the National Medical Association2007
Breast cancer risk assessment in socioeconomically disadvantaged urban communities.
Article in Journal of the National Medical Association, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The FYI on MRI: Protocol for a randomized, parallel-group superiority trial of a multilevel decision support intervention to increase informed decision-making about screening breast MRI among high-risk black and Latina women.Contemporary clinical trials · 2026Article
- Assessment of common risk factors and validation of the Gail model for breast cancer: A hospital-based study from Western India.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
During 2005, a risk assessment tool based on the Gail model was used to calculate the five-year risk of developing breast cancer for 445 women who live in socioeconomically disadvantaged urban communities in western Pennsylvania and who attended health fairs and other community-sponsored activities. This tool allowed us to evaluate each woman and advise her of her risks in a process lasting 15-20 minutes. Of the 445 women, 71.7% were black and 21.6% had a higher than average risk. The proportion of white women at high risk was significantly greater than the proportion of black women at high risk (33.3% vs. 16.9%; P < 0.01). The Gail model assessment tool for use in low-income and minority populations holds promise because it is noninvasive, is easy to use and provides immediate data about risk. This risk communication may help encourage minority and low-income women to receive screening mammography. It has the potential to improve breast cancer screening rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17668640PMC2574352W2406469528What 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.