ArticleJournal of behavioral medicine2022
Affect regulation as a moderator of intentions for breast cancer chemoprevention.
Article in Journal of behavioral medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceptions of Chemoprevention Among Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Emotional Reactivity and Regulation Relate to Surgical Treatment Decision Making Among Newly Diagnosed Women With Breast Cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Women at high risk for breast cancer (BC) may consider chemoprevention for risk reduction, but uptake is low. This study examined the role of affect regulation (the attempt to alter or control one's emotions) in decision-making about BC chemoprevention. A cross-sectional, single group design was used. High-risk women (N = 81) were surveyed. Moderation analyses specified cancer-specific distress as the independent variable, affect regulation (cognitive reappraisal or expressive suppression) as the moderator, and chemoprevention intentions (yes = 1, unsure = 0, no = -1) as the dependent variable. Cognitive reappraisal significantly moderated the relationship between cancer-specific distress and chemoprevention intentions (p = 0.03), but expressive suppression did not (p = 0.31). For the 44% of participants who were highest on reappraisal, higher cancer-specific distress was associated with greater intentions for chemoprevention. For the remaining 56%, there was no relationship between cancer-specific distress and chemoprevention intentions. Cognitive reappraisal may play an important role in decisions regarding uptake of chemoprevention.
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.