Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25886583›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2015

General Practitioners and Breast Surgeons in France, Germany, Netherlands and the UK show variable breast cancer risk communication profiles.

Claire Julian-Reynier, Anne-Deborah Bouhnik, D Gareth Evans, Hilary Harris, Christi J van Asperen, Aad Tibben, Joerg Schmidtke, Irmgard Nippert

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Healthcare Providers' Strategies to Improve Breast Cancer Screening Among South Asian Women in Victoria.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Patient-Centered Care in Breast Cancer Genetic Clinics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Claire Julian-ReynierInstitut Paoli-Calmettes, UMR_S 912, 232 Boulevard Sainte Marguerite, 13009, Marseille, France. claire.julian-reynier@inserm.fr.
Anne-Deborah BouhnikINSERM, UMR_S 912, Marseille, France. anne-deborah.bouhnik@inserm.fr.
D Gareth EvansDepartment of Genomic Medicine, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, St. Mary's Hospital, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK. Gareth.Evans@cmft.nhs.uk.
Hilary HarrisGenEd Coordinating Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. hilaryharris@btinternet.com.
Christi J van AsperenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands. C.J.van_Asperen@lumc.nl.
Aad TibbenDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands. A.Tibben@lumc.nl.
Joerg SchmidtkeInstitute of Human Genetics, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. Schmidtke.Joerg@mh-hannover.de.
Irmgard NippertWomen's Health Research, Münster Medical School, Münster, Germany. nippert@uni-muenster.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNo information is available on the attitudes of General Practitioners (GPs) and Breast Surgeons (BSs) to their delivery of genetic, environmental and lifestyle risk factor information about breast cancer. The aim of this study was to describe the Breast Cancer Risk Communication Behaviours (RCBs) reported by GPs and BSs in four European countries and to determine the relationships between their RCBs and their socio-occupational characteristics.

methodsSelf-administered questionnaires assessing breast cancer risk communication behaviours using vignettes were mailed to a sample of Breast Surgeons (BS) and General Practitioners (GP) working in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK (N = 7292). Their responses to questions about the risk factors were first ordered and compared by specialty and country after making multivariate adjustments. Rather than defining a standard Risk Presentation Format (RPF) a priori, the various RPFs used by the respondents were analyzed using cluster analysis.

resultsFamily history and hormonal replacement therapy were the risk factors most frequently mentioned by the 2094 respondents included in this study. Lifestyle BC risk factors such as obesity and alcohol were rarely/occasionally mentioned, but this point differed (p < 0.001) depending on the country and the specialty of the providers involved. Five distinct RPF profiles including the numerical/verbal presentation of absolute/relative risks were identified. The most frequently encountered RPF (34.2%) was characterized by the fact that it included no negative framing of the risks, i.e., the probability of not developing cancer was not mentioned. Age, specialty and country of practice were all found to be significant determinants of the RPF clusters.

conclusionsThe increasing trend for GPs and BSs to discuss lifestyle risk factors with their patients suggests that this may be a relevant means of improving breast cancer prevention. Physicians' risk communication skills should be improved during their initial and vocational training.

Indexed as

General PractitionersHealth CommunicationSurgeonsAdultBreast NeoplasmsFemaleFranceGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsRiskSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID25886583
PMCPMC4393864

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.