Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25476701›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2014

Breast cancer risk perceptions of Turkish women attending primary care: a cross-sectional study.

Mehtap Kartal, Nilgun Ozcakar, Sehnaz Hatipoglu, Makbule Neslisah Tan, Azize Dilek Guldal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 · 2018
    Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mehtap KartalDepartment of Family Medicine, Medical Faculty of Dokuz Eylul University, 35340, Inciralti, Izmir, Turkey. mehtapkartal@gmail.com.
Nilgun OzcakarDepartment of Family Medicine, Medical Faculty of Dokuz Eylul University, 35340, Inciralti, Izmir, Turkey. nilgunozcakar@gmail.com.
Sehnaz HatipogluFamily Medicine Specialist, Ministry of Health, 24th Family Health Center, Izmir, Turkey. sehnaz63@yahoo.com.
Makbule Neslisah TanFamily Medicine Specialist, Izmir, Turkey. drnesli293@hotmail.com.
Azize Dilek GuldalDepartment of Family Medicine, Medical Faculty of Dokuz Eylul University, 35340, Inciralti, Izmir, Turkey. dilek.guldal@gmail.com.
Dokuz Eylül University · TRMinistry of Health · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the risks and benefits of early detection and primary prevention strategies for breast cancer are beginning to be quantified, the risk perception of women has become increasingly important as may affect their screening behaviors. This study evaluated the women's breast cancer risk perception and their accuracy, and determined the factors that can affect their risk perception accuracy.

methodsData was collected in a cross-sectional survey design. Questionnaire, including breast cancer risk factors, risk perceptions and screening behaviors, answered by 624 women visiting primary health care center (PHCC). "Perceived risk" investigated with numeric and verbal measures. Accuracy of risk perception was determined by women's Gail 5-year risk scores.

resultsThe mean age of the participants was 59.62 ± 1.97 years. Of the women 6.7% had a first-degree relative with breast cancer, 68.9% performed breast self-examination and 62.3% had a mammography, and 82.9% expressed their breast cancer worry as "low". The numeric measure correlated better with worry and Gail scores. Of the women 65.5% perceived their breast cancer risk accurately. Among the women in "high risk" group 65.7% underestimated, while in "average risk" group 25.4% overestimated their risk.

conclusionsTurkish women visiting PHCC are overtly and overly optimistic. This was especially obvious with the result that nearly one third had had no mammography. There is a need for further studies to understand why and how this optimism is maintained so that better screening strategies can be applied at PHCC. All health workers working at PHCC have to be aware of this optimism to prevent missed opportunities for cancer screening.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareAge FactorsBreast NeoplasmsBreast Self-ExaminationCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerEducational StatusFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth StatusHumansMammographyMarital StatusMiddle AgedPerceptionRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID25476701
PMCPMC4262994
OpenAlexW2167267165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.