ArticleWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
Predicting the use of individualized risk assessment for breast cancer.
Article in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A randomized comparison of print and web communication on colorectal cancer screening.JAMA internal medicine · 2013Trial
- Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Among Low-Income Women of Color in Primary Care: A Pilot Study.Journal of oncology practice · 2015Article
- Monitoring style of coping with cancer related threats: a review of the literature.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2014Review
- Individual breast cancer risk assessment in underserved populations: integrating empirical bioethics and health disparities research.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2012Article
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
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the decision to obtain individualized risk assessment (IRA) after a breast cancer education session.
methodsA sample of both African American and Caucasian women was used to determine if there were differences by race/ethnicity in uptake of the assessment and differences in the variables that were most predictive of uptake. The sample included 166 women between the ages of 18 and 80. Sixty-two percent of the sample were African American women. KEY
findingsThe results suggested that African American women and Caucasian women used different factors and used other factors differently to decide whether or not to obtain an IRA. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: These results are discussed within the context of health disparities among ethnic minority and Caucasian women with implications for breast cancer control programs. The results of this study suggest that knowledge alone does not lead to opting for a personalized risk assessment, and that African American and Caucasian women use different pieces of information, or information differently to make decision about getting more personalized information about risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.