Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33260928›Full record

ArticleCancers2020

Women's Intentions to Engage in Risk-Reducing Behaviours after Receiving Personal Ovarian Cancer Risk Information: An Experimental Survey Study.

Ailish Gallagher, Jo Waller, Ranjit Manchanda, Ian Jacobs, Saskia Sanderson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Screening and prevention of ovarian cancer.The Medical journal of Australia · 2024
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Attitude towards hereditary cancer risk management among women with cancer in Taiwan.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  5. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ailish GallagherResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
Jo WallerCancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, Great Maze Pond, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Ranjit ManchandaWolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3381-5057
Ian JacobsDepartment of Women's Health, University of New South Wales, Australia, Level 1, Chancellery Building, Sydney 2052, Australia.
Saskia SandersonResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8427-724X
University College London · GBGuy's Hospital · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

Cancer Research UK C1418/A414134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk stratification using genetic and/or other types of information could identify women at increased ovarian cancer risk. The aim of this study was to examine women's potential reactions to ovarian cancer risk stratification. A total of 1017 women aged 45-75 years took part in an online experimental survey. Women were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions describing hypothetical personal results from ovarian cancer risk stratification, and asked to imagine they had received one of three results: (a) 5% lifetime risk due to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and lifestyle factors; (b) 10% lifetime risk due to SNPs and lifestyle factors; (c) 10% lifetime risk due to a single rare mutation in a gene. Results: 83% of women indicated interest in having ovarian cancer risk assessment. After receiving their hypothetical risk estimates, 29% of women stated they would have risk-reducing surgery. Choosing risk-reducing surgery over other behavioural responses was associated with having higher surgery self-efficacy and perceived response-efficacy, but not with perceptions of disease threat, i.e., perceived risk or severity, or with experimental condition. A substantial proportion of women age 45-75 years may be open to the idea of surgery to reduce risk of ovarian cancer, even if their absolute lifetime risk is only increased to as little as 5 or 10%.

Indexed as

attitudesgenomicsquestionnairesrisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID33260928
PMCPMC7760356
OpenAlexW3106906882

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.