ArticleCancers2021
UK Women's Views of the Concepts of Personalised Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Risk-Stratified Breast Screening: A Qualitative Interview Study.
Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled 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
- Acceptability of de-intensified screening for women at low risk of breast cancer: a randomised online experimental survey.BMC cancer · 2024Trial
- Priorities for breast cancer risk assessment in UK women under age 50: a survey and discrete choice experiment.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Understanding the preferences of younger women for the delivery of a service to predict breast cancer risk: a discrete choice experiment.BJC reports · 2026Article
- Acceptability of breast cancer risk assessment for women aged 30-49: Views of women from six under-served groups.PloS one · 2026Article
- "Because That is the Right Thing to do": A Focus Group Study of Australian Expert Perspectives on Offering Smoking Cessation Support in Lung Cancer Screening.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Primary Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Strategies in East and Southeast Asia.Cancers · 2025Review
- Genetic discrimination in insurance and employment based on personalized risk stratification for breast cancer screening.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Public acceptability and anticipated uptake of risk-stratified bowel cancer screening in the UK: An online survey.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
- Attitudes towards risk-stratified breast cancer screening in Denmark - a qualitative study.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Review
- Risk-Adapted Breast Screening for Women at Low Predicted Risk of Breast Cancer: An Online Discrete Choice Experiment.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review.Preventive medicine · 2024Article
- How do women at increased risk of breast cancer make sense of their risk? An interpretative phenomenological analysis.British journal of health psychology · 2023Article
- Implementation of risk stratification within bowel cancer screening: a community jury study exploring public acceptability and communication needs.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Impact of a risk based breast screening decision aid on understanding, acceptance and decision making.NPJ breast cancer · 2023Article
- What do women think about having received their breast cancer risk as part of a risk-stratified NHS Breast Screening Programme? A qualitative study.British journal of cancer · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Any introduction of risk-stratification within the NHS Breast Screening Programme needs to be considered acceptable by women. We conducted interviews to explore women's attitudes to personalised risk assessment and risk-stratified breast screening. Twenty-five UK women were purposively sampled by screening experience and socioeconomic background. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analysed using Framework Analysis. Women expressed positive intentions for personal risk assessment and willingness to receive risk feedback to provide reassurance and certainty. Women responded to risk-stratified screening scenarios in three ways: 'Overall acceptors' considered both high- and low-risk options acceptable as a reasonable allocation of resources to clinical need, yet acceptability was subject to specified conditions including accuracy of risk estimates and availability of support throughout the screening pathway. Others who thought 'more is better' only supported high-risk scenarios where increased screening was proposed. 'Screening sceptics' found low-risk scenarios more aligned to their screening values than high-risk screening options. Consideration of screening recommendations for other risk groups had more influence on women's responses than screening-related harms. These findings demonstrate high, but not universal, acceptability. Support and guidance, tailored to screening values and preferences, may be required by women at all levels of risk.
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.