ArticleThe Journal of men's studies2013
Factors Associated With Cancer Family History Communication Between African American Men and Their Relatives.
Article in The Journal of men's studies, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Gender differences in self-reported family history of cancer: A review and secondary data analysis.Cancer medicine · 2020Pooled it
- The KinFact intervention - a randomized controlled trial to increase family communication about cancer history.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2014Trial
- Beliefs Underlying Colorectal Cancer Information Seeking Among Young Black Adults: a Reasoned Action Approach Elicitation Study.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- The Role of Age and Multimorbidity in Shaping Older African American Men's Experiences with Patient⁻Provider Communication.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Cancer Visibility among Iranian Familial Networks: To What Extent Can We Rely on Family History Reports?PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
African American men bear a disproportionately high burden from cancer in the U.S. The American Cancer Society reports that for all cancer sites combined, African American men are 32% more likely to die than white men (American Cancer Society, 2011). Having a family history of cancer elevates an individual's risk for the disease and should inform decision-making around the use of specific cancer screening tests as well as earlier onset and frequency of cancer screening. Adult African American men who attended an annual hospital-based community health fair in the Midwest which targeted minority men, were approached to complete a paper-based survey. Participants were asked "have you ever talked with any of your relatives about your family history of cancer (about any members of your family who have been diagnosed with cancer)?" Predictors were evaluated using bivariate analysis and logistic regression; they included socio-demographic, health access, health behavior, health status, and communication variables. Participants were 558 African American men with a mean age of 54 years old. African American men were most likely to have ever discussed their family history of cancer with a relative if they had specific knowledge of their family history of cancer and if they had ever talked to a physician about their family history of cancer. For African American men with a familial predisposition to cancer, further examination of barriers and facilitators to discussion with relatives, specifically those related to health access and knowledge, is warranted.
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.