ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021
Exploring Implementation of Personal Breast Cancer Risk Assessments.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polygenic risk scores in the clinic: a systematic review of stakeholders' perspectives, attitudes, and experiences.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Pooled it
- Acceptability and perceptions of personalised risk-based cancer screening among health-care professionals and the general public: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Lancet. Public health · 2025Pooled it
- "For and against" factors influencing participation in personalized breast cancer screening programs: a qualitative systematic review until March 2022.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Pooled it
- Acceptability of risk stratification within population-based cancer screening from the perspective of the general public: A mixed-methods systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of NICE criteria with the BOADICEA multifactorial risk model to guide breast cancer risk assessment and referral amongst women under age 50 within primary care.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- The co-design, development, and preliminary evaluation of a comprehensive breast cancer risk report incorporating polygenic risk information.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Considering Clinical Implementation of Polygenic Scores in Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment: Recipients' Perspectives on Influencing Factors and Strategies.The patient · 2025Article
- Cohort Profile: Lifepool.International journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Proactive breast cancer risk assessment in primary care: a review based on the principles of screening.British journal of cancer · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personal Breast Cancer (BC) Risk Assessments (PBCRA) have potential to stratify women into clinically-actionable BC risk categories. As this could involve population-wide genomic testing, women's attitudes to PBCRA and views on acceptable implementation platforms must be considered to ensure optimal population participation. We explored these issues with 31 women with different BC risk profiles through semi-structured focus group discussions or interviews. Inductive thematic coding of transcripts was performed. Subsequently, women listed factors that would impact on their decision to participate. Participants' attitudes to PBCRA were positive. Identified themes included that PBCRA acceptance hinges on result actionability. Women value the ability to inform decision-making. Participants reported anxiety, stress, and genetic discrimination as potential barriers. The age at which PBCRA was offered, ease of access, and how results are returned held importance. Most women value the opportunity for PBCRA to inform increased surveillance, while highlighting hesitance to accept reduced surveillance as they find reassurance in regular screening. Women with
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.