ArticleBritish journal of cancer2023
What do women think about having received their breast cancer risk as part of a risk-stratified NHS Breast Screening Programme? A qualitative study.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- Priorities for breast cancer risk assessment in UK women under age 50: a survey and discrete choice experiment.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Experiences of implementation of personalised risk estimates for breast cancer in clinical practice: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.Journal of community genetics · 2026Review
- Parental and public views on genomic newborn screening: a systematic review.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Review
- Modeling Individual-Level Uncertainty From Missing Data in Multifactorial Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.JCO precision oncology · 2026Article
- How do women experience a change in their clinically-derived breast cancer risk estimates: views from a UK family history risk and prevention clinic.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Risk stratification in fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening: Public acceptance and experiences with tailored invitation intervals.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Structural equation modeling of factors influencing women's attitudes, comfort and willingness toward risk-stratified breast cancer screening.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Illness risk representations underlying women's breast cancer risk appraisals: A theory-informed qualitative analysis.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
- Do women with a history of breast cancer recommend risk-based breast cancer screening? An in-depth interview study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Attitudes towards risk-stratified breast cancer screening in Denmark - a qualitative study.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Article
- Communicating the results of risk-based breast cancer screening through visualizations of risk: a participatory design approach.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening in Malaysia: Challenges and Opportunities.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Review
- Acceptability of breast cancer risk assessment amongst general population women aged 30-39 years: A qualitative study.Women's health (London, England)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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRisk-stratified screening is being considered for national breast screening programmes. It is unclear how women experience risk-stratified screening and receipt of breast cancer risk information in real time. This study aimed to explore the psychological impact of undergoing risk-stratified screening within England's NHS Breast Screening Programme.
methodsIndividual telephone interviews were conducted with 40 women who participated in the BC-Predict study and received a letter indicating their estimated breast cancer risk as one of four risk categories: low (<2% 10-year risk), average (2-4.99%), above average (moderate; 5-7.99%) or high (≥8%). Audio-recorded interview transcriptions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsTwo themes were produced: 'From risk expectations to what's my future health story?' highlights that women overall valued the opportunity to receive risk estimates; however, when these were discordant with perceived risk, this causes temporary distress or rejection of the information. 'Being a good (woman) citizen' where women felt positive contributing to society but may feel judged if they then cannot exert agency over the management of their risk or access follow-up support
conclusionsRisk-stratified breast screening was generally accepted without causing long-lasting distress; however, issues related to risk communication and access to care pathways need to be considered for implementation.
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.