ArticleBMC cancer2017
A qualitative study on Singaporean women's views towards breast cancer screening and Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) gene testing to guide personalised screening strategies.
Article in BMC cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spousal perceptions and their role in promoting breast cancer screening: a focus group study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Do women with a history of breast cancer recommend risk-based breast cancer screening? An in-depth interview study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review.Preventive medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- The current status of risk-stratified breast screening.British journal of cancer · 2022Review
- BREAst screening Tailored for HEr (BREATHE)-A study protocol on personalised risk-based breast cancer screening programme.PloS one · 2022Article
- Breast cancer risk stratification for mammographic screening: A nation-wide screening cohort of 24,431 women in Singapore.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Exploring Implementation of Personal Breast Cancer Risk Assessments.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Impact of health talks on knowledge, attitudes and perception of breast cancer screening and treatment amongst healthcare staff by a breast surgical unit in a public healthcare institution: a cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2021Article
- Breast Cancer Information Behaviours and Needs among Singapore Women: A Qualitative Study.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2021Article
- Cost effectiveness analysis of a polygenic risk tailored breast cancer screening programme in Singapore.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Women's preferences, willingness-to-pay, and predicted uptake for single-nucleotide polymorphism gene testing to guide personalized breast cancer screening strategies: a discrete choice experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer is the top cancer by incidence and mortality in Singaporean women. Mammography is by far its best screening tool, but current recommended age and interval may not yield the most benefit. Recent studies have demonstrated the potential of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to improve discriminatory accuracy of breast cancer risk assessment models. This study was conducted to understand Singaporean women's views towards breast cancer screening and SNPs gene testing to guide personalised screening strategies.
methodsFocus group discussions were conducted among English-speaking women (n = 27) between 40 to 65 years old, both current and lapsed mammogram users. Women were divided into four groups based on age and mammogram usage. Discussions about breast cancer and screening experience, as well as perception and attitude towards SNPs gene testing were conducted by an experienced moderator. Women were also asked for factors that will influence their uptake of the test. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis to captured similarities and differences in views expressed.
resultsBarriers to repeat mammogram attendance include laziness to make appointment and painful and uncomfortable screening process. However, the underlying reason may be low perceived susceptibility to breast cancer. Facilitators to repeat mammogram attendance include ease of making appointment and timely reminders. Women were generally receptive towards SNPs gene testing, but required information on accuracy, cost, invasiveness, and side effects before they decide whether to go for it. Other factors include waiting time for results and frequency interval. On average, women gave a rating of 7.5 (range 5 to 10) when asked how likely they will go for the test.
conclusionAddressing concerns such as pain and discomfort during mammogram, providing timely reminders and debunking breast cancer myths can help to improve screening uptake. Women demonstrated a spectrum of responses towards a novel test like SNPs gene testing, but need more information to make an informed decision. Future public health education on predictive genetic testing should adequately address both benefits and risks. Findings from this study is used to inform a discrete choice experiment to empirically quantify women preferences and willingness-to-pay for SNPs gene testing.
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.