Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19682358›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2009

Development and validation of a simple questionnaire for the identification of hereditary breast cancer in primary care.

Patricia Ashton-Prolla, Juliana Giacomazzi, Aishameriane V Schmidt, Fernanda L Roth, Edenir I Palmero, Luciane Kalakun, Ernestina S Aguiar, Susana M Moreira, Erica Batassini, Vanessa Belo-Reyes and 4 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readEvaluation StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06564428 (A Cohort Study of Hereditary Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction Models and Pathogenesis Exploration), which is not on this map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06564428 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

A Cohort Study of Hereditary Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction Models and Pathogenesis Exploration

TypeobservationalSponsorPeking University Third HospitalRan2024 to 2026Enrolled1,000ConditionsOvarian NeoplasmsArmsSuspective gene mutations and family history
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Family history tools for primary care: A systematic review.The European journal of general practice · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Genetic cancer risk assessment in general practice: systematic review of tools available, clinician attitudes, and patient outcomes.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Pathologic Findings at Risk Reducing Surgery inDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Patricia Ashton-ProllaPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Genética e Biologia Molecular, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul , Porto Alegre, Brazil. pprolla@hcpa.ufrgs.br
Juliana Giacomazzi
Aishameriane V Schmidt
Fernanda L Roth
Edenir I Palmero
Luciane Kalakun
Ernestina S Aguiar
Susana M Moreira
Erica Batassini
Vanessa Belo-Reyes
Lavinia Schuler-Faccini
Roberto Giugliani
Maira Caleffi
Suzi Alves Camey
Hospital Moinhos de Vento · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BRNational Institute on Population Medical Genetics · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer is a significant public health problem worldwide and the development of tools to identify individuals at-risk for hereditary breast cancer syndromes, where specific interventions can be proposed to reduce risk, has become increasingly relevant. A previous study in Southern Brazil has shown that a family history suggestive of these syndromes may be prevalent at the primary care level. Development of a simple and sensitive instrument, easily applicable in primary care units, would be particularly helpful in underserved communities in which identification and referral of high-risk individuals is difficult.

methodsA simple 7-question instrument about family history of breast, ovarian and colorectal cancer, FHS-7, was developed to screen for individuals with an increased risk for hereditary breast cancer syndromes. FHS-7 was applied to 9218 women during routine visits to primary care units in Southern Brazil. Two consecutive samples of 885 women and 910 women who answered positively to at least one question and negatively to all questions were included, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were determined.

resultsOf the 885 women reporting a positive family history, 211 (23.8%; CI95%: 21.5-26.2) had a pedigree suggestive of a hereditary breast and/or breast and colorectal cancer syndrome. Using as cut point one positive answer, the sensitivity and specificity of the instrument were 87.6% and 56.4%, respectively. Concordance between answers in two different applications was given by a intra-class correlation (ICC) of 0.84 for at least one positive answer. Temporal stability of the instrument was adequate (ICC = 0.65).

conclusionA simple instrument for the identification of the most common hereditary breast cancer syndrome phenotypes, showing good specificity and temporal stability was developed and could be used as a screening tool in primary care to refer at-risk individuals for genetic evaluations.

Indexed as

AdultBrazilBreast NeoplasmsCohort StudiesData CollectionFemaleGenetic Diseases, InbornHumansMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID19682358
PMCPMC2739222
OpenAlexW2127526423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.