ArticleWorld journal of surgery2019
Understanding and Practices of Gynaecologists Related to Breast Cancer Screening, Detection, Treatment and Common Breast Diseases: A Study from India.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Attitudes of Gynecologists toward Referral of Women to Breast Imaging Clinics for Breast Cancer Screening or Diagnosis.Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Association between breast nodules, anxiety, depression and metabolic risk factors in a Chinese cohort.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe knowledge of breast cancer risk factors and screening practices in a community is largely influenced by the practising gynaecologist in that area. We assessed the understanding and knowledge of gynaecologists about breast cancer: screening, risk factors, clinical signs, management and common benign breast diseases. METHODOLOGY: This cross-sectional study was carried out in Uttar Pradesh, India, from April to September 2017. One hundred and fifty-two gynaecologists were assessed using a self-designed and validated questionnaire to assess the knowledge of risk factors, clinical signs, screening practices and management of breast cancer as well as common benign breast diseases. Further, the results were compared based on their education: undergraduates (UGs; no residency experience in obstetrics and gynaecology) versus postgraduates (PGs; residency experience in obstetrics and gynaecology).
results67 and 82.2% of gynaecologists possess excellent to very good knowledge of risk factors and clinical signs of breast cancer, respectively. The knowledge of PGs seems to be better than UGs (p < 0.01). 84.9% participants were aware that breast cancer screening decreases breast cancer-related mortality, and 61.2% considered CBE as most relevant screening investigation (66.1% PGs and 41.9% UGs; p = 0.04). 30.2% regularly offer breast cancer screening at their centre. 58.5% did not consider screening mammography as cost-effective for their patients (57.9% PGs and 61.3% UGs; p = 0.72), and 41.4% considered it to be a time-consuming process (39.7% PGs and 48.4% UGs; p = 0.38). 99.3% like to follow up a patient with familial breast cancer by themselves, and 0.7% like to refer them to specialist. 51.9% gynaecologists were convinced of breast conservation surgery (BCS) as a surgical option, however 51.3% feared leaving diseased breast behind.
conclusionDespite the knowledge regarding risk factors, clinical signs and treatment of breast cancer and benign breast diseases was found adequate amongst the gynaecologists, this did not apply to their clinical practice. Structured and continuous training of gynaecologists is needed to improve the outcome of patients with breast diseases in terms of better management and reference.
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.