ArticleBMC medical genomics2025
Predicting breast cancer risk and its association to biopsychosocial factors among Taiwanese women with a family history of breast cancer: an investigation based on the Gail model.
Article in BMC medical genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFirst-degree relatives with breast cancer have a two-fold higher risk than women without a family history. The Gail model approach has been employed in numerous studies to investigate the risk of breast cancer among women in a variety of countries. Nevertheless, the studies investigating the correlation between the level of breast cancer risk and biopsychosocial factors among Taiwanese women with a family history of breast cancer (FHBC) are limited. By using the Gail model, we explored the breast cancer risk score and its relationship to biopsychosocial factors among Taiwanese women with FHBC.
methodsThe present study was a cross-sectional study from secondary data of the Taiwan Biobank from 2008 to 2018. Self-reports were conducted to determine biopsychosocial factors. A total of 3,060 women aged 35-70 years with and without FHBC were considered eligible for enrollment. The Gail model, which utilizes six questions, was used to estimate individual five-year absolute breast cancer risk. Women with scores at least 1.66% and above were categorized as high risk. In addition, we performed bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis using SPSS version 27 to predict the associations between biopsychosocial factors and the risk of breast cancer based on the Gail model. All analyses were stratified by age.
resultsAmong the 3,060 Taiwanese women, there was a statistically significant difference in breast cancer risk score between the groups with and without FHBC (p = < 0.001), stratified by age, of which 574 in FHBC group (34.2%) were identified as having a high breast cancer risk based on the Gail model. Furthermore, six out of 15 biopsychosocial factors were significantly associated with breast cancer risk in women under 50 years of age, while seven factors showed significant associations in women aged 50 years and older. Logistic regression analysis identified five biopsychosocial factors as consistent and significant predictors of breast cancer risk in women aged 50 years and older, highlighting this group as particularly vulnerable.
conclusionsThis study concludes that the Gail model identifies Taiwanese women who have a higher estimated risk of breast cancer based on cross-sectional data. Various biopsychosocial factors are associated with higher risk estimates in this population particularly in older women. Professionals can assist women in recognizing risk factors beyond the inevitable risk by encouraging regular screenings, positive behavior, and health promotion.
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.