ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2014
Does perceived risk predict breast cancer screening use? Findings from a prospective cohort study of female relatives from the Ontario site of the breast cancer family registry.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Development and validation of an online nomogram to predict breast cancer screening participation among high-risk women: A cross-sectional study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Provincial Variation in Adherence to Breast Cancer Screening in Canada: Evidence From the Canadian Partnership for Tomorrow's Health.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Breast cancer surveillance in BRCA positive Sri Lankan women: health equity for a high-risk group at a limited resource setting.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Patterns and predictors of adherence to breast cancer screening recommendations in Alberta's Tomorrow Project.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Breast Cancer Risk Perception and Mammography Screening Behavior of Women in Northeast Brazil.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2020Article
- Women with Family History of Breast Cancer: How Much Are They Aware of Their Risk?Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018Article
- Why Do Some People Choose Opportunistic Rather Than Organized Cancer Screening? The Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) 2010-2012.Cancer research and treatment · 2017Article
- A Risk Assessment Comparison of Breast Cancer and Factors Affected to Risk Perception of Women in Turkey: A Cross-sectional Study.Iranian journal of public health · 2017Article
- Breast cancer risk feedback to women in the UK NHS breast screening population.British journal of cancer · 2016Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
While the relationship between perceived risk and breast cancer screening use has been studied extensively, most studies are cross-sectional. We prospectively examined this relationship among 913 women, aged 25-72 with varying levels of familial breast cancer risk from the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry. Associations between perceived lifetime breast cancer risk and subsequent use of mammography, clinical breast examination (CBE) and genetic testing were assessed using logistic regression. Overall, perceived risk did not predict subsequent use of mammography, CBE or genetic testing. Among women at moderate/high familial risk, those reporting a perceived risk greater than 50% were significantly less likely to have a CBE (odds ratio (OR) = 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30-0.91, p = 0.04), and non-significantly less likely to have a mammogram (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.40-1.20, p = 0.70) or genetic test (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.34-1.10, p = 0.09) compared to women reporting a perceived risk of 50%. In contrast, among women at low familial risk, those reporting a perceived risk greater than 50% were non-significantly more likely to have a mammogram (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.59-2.16, p = 0.78), CBE (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.63-1.95, p = 0.74) or genetic test (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.50-3.33, p = 0.35) compared to women reporting a perceived risk of 50%. Perceived risk did not significantly predict screening use overall, however this relationship may be moderated by level of familial risk. Results may inform risk education and management strategies for women with varying levels of familial breast cancer 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.