Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33145151›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2020

The accuracy of breast cancer risk self-assessment does not correlate with knowledge about breast cancer and knowledge and attitudes towards primary chemoprevention.

Kristina Bojanic, Sonja Vukadin, Kaja Grgic, Luka Malenica, Filip Sarcevic, Robert Smolic, Kristina Kralik, Aleksandar Včev, George Y Wu, Martina Smolic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2020. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Breast cancer knowledge and practices amongst women in Algeria.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    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

10 authors.

Kristina BojanicDepartment of Biophysics and Radiology, Faculty of Dental Medicine and Health Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
Sonja VukadinDepartment of Pharmacology and Biochemistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine and Health Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
Kaja GrgicDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
Luka MalenicaDepartment of Patophysiology, Physiology and Immunology, Faculty of Dental Medicine and Health Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
Filip SarcevicDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
Robert SmolicDepartment of Patophysiology, Physiology and Immunology, Faculty of Dental Medicine and Health Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
Kristina KralikDepartment of Medical Statistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
Aleksandar VčevDepartment of Patophysiology, Physiology and Immunology, Faculty of Dental Medicine and Health Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.
George Y WuDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastrenterology/Hepatology, University of Connecticut Health Center, 263 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, CT 06032, USA.
Martina SmolicDepartment of Pharmacology and Biochemistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine and Health Osijek, J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Osijek 31000, Croatia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increase of breast cancer (BC) incidence has drawn attention to BC risk as means of reducing mortality and morbidity of the disease. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of BC risk perception, evaluate factors that affect risk perception and assess the correlation between BC risk perception and attitudes towards BC chemoprevention. A cross-sectional study included total of 258 women with average and high-risk for BC according to the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT). All data were collected by face-to-face interview by three trained 6th year medical school students using a 54-item questionnaire. Each participant's actual BC risk was compared to a perceived risk and the accuracy of the BC risk self-assessment was determined. 72% of high-risk women underestimated their BC risk (p < 0.001). One third of subjects with a family history of BC have also underestimated their own risk (p = 0.002). Women who responded to screening mammography were more informed about BC risk factors (p = 0.001). General knowledge about BC chemoprevention was surprisingly low, regardless of the accuracy of BC risk self-assessment. High-risk women appear to be unrealistically optimistic, since there was a significant difference between the accuracy of self-perceived risk and the objective BC risk.

Indexed as

AttitudesBCRAT risk modelBreast cancerBreast cancer risk perceptionChemopreventionKnowledge

Identifiers

PMID33145151
PMCPMC7593623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.