ArticleBMC cancer2022
Understanding breast cancer risk factors: is there any mismatch between laywomen perceptions and expert opinions.
Article in BMC cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring UK breastmilk donors' perspectives on breastfeeding as a protective factor against breast cancer: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Quantum-SpinalNet: a hybrid deep learning approach for mammographic breast cancer detection.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Learning Architecture for Brain Tumor Classification Based on Deep Convolutional Neural Network: Classic and ResNet50.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Emerging Role of Gut Microbiota in Breast Cancer Development and Its Implications in Treatment.Metabolites · 2024Review
- Addressing knowledge and behavior gaps in breast cancer risks: implications for health promotion and intervention strategies.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Associations of Obesity, Physical Activity, and Screening With State-Level Trends and Racial and Ethnic Disparities of Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality in the US.JAMA network open · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen's perception and knowledge of breast cancer signs, symptoms, and risk factors could be conducive to breast cancer risk management and interventions. The present study aimed to explore Iranian laywomen perceptions and expert opinions regarding breast cancer risk factors.
methodsThis qualitative study was conducted from March to November 2019 in Mashhad, northeast of Iran. Through purposive sampling, 24 laywomen (women with and without BC) and 10 experts of different fields including oncology, surgery, gynecology and reproductive health were selected. Data collection was carried out using semi-structured interviews, which was mainly focused on the participants' understanding and perception of BC risk factors. The data was analyzed utilizing conventional content analysis developed by Graneheim & Lundman. Components of trustworthiness, including credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability were considered.
resultsThe main category of risk factors, which emerged from the lay participants' data analysis, were "unhealthy lifestyle and habits" , "hormonal influences", "environmental exposures", "Individual susceptibility "and "belief in supernatural powers". The experts had similar perspectives for certain risk factors, yet not for all. The category of "Individual history of disease" was emerged only from experts' interviews.
conclusionIn the present study, the lay participants' perception concerning BC risk factors was found to be a mixture of cultural beliefs and the scientific knowledge dispersed by the media, internet, and health services. Primary prevention approaches, including awareness of breast cancer risk factors, are required for women to make improved health-related choices.
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.