Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41606535›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2026

How do women experience a change in their clinically-derived breast cancer risk estimates: views from a UK family history risk and prevention clinic.

Victoria G Woof, Anthony Howell, Lynne Fox, Lorna McWilliams, D Gareth Evans, David P French

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Victoria G WoofUniversity of Manchester, 1.13 Coupland 1 Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. victoria.woof@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4069-5188
Anthony HowellUniversity of Manchester, 1.13 Coupland 1 Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6233-719X
Lynne FoxFamily History Risk and Prevention Clinic, Prevent Breast Cancer Unit, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Lorna McWilliamsUniversity of Manchester, 1.13 Coupland 1 Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6414-2732
D Gareth EvansUniversity of Manchester, 1.13 Coupland 1 Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8482-5784
David P FrenchUniversity of Manchester, 1.13 Coupland 1 Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7663-7804

Funding

Manchester Biomedical Research Centre IS-BRC-1215-20007Medical Research Council MR/N013751/1Programme Grants for Applied Research RP-PG-0707-10031
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntroducing breast density and polygenic risk scores into breast cancer prediction models results in greater precision and can involve alterations to previously communicated risk estimates and preventative management. This study explored how women from a UK family history risk and prevention clinic view, experience and understand a change in their communicated risk.

methodsTwenty-two women were interviewed; 11 received an increased risk and 11 a decreased risk. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

resultsFour themes were generated: (i) unaware of possibility of risk change, illustrating women believed their risk estimates would remain unaltered due to their family history, hence receiving a lower risk was shocking but a relief, but an increased risk somewhat unsurprising, (ii) a trusted source influences adapted risk appraisals, highlighting the clinic's reputation as an information source, as well as personal connections with the service effecting risk appraisals, (iii) perceived value of new risk factor knowledge, where women contemplated the usefulness of knowing their breast density and polygenic risk scores, (iv) heart versus head: changes in preventative management, where the implications of an updated risk estimate was processed.

conclusionsWomen reacted positively to their updated breast cancer risk estimates and trusted the information provided, even when preventative management options changed.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultAgedFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic Risk ScoreHumansMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsUnited KingdomBreast cancerBreast cancer riskCancer preventionEarly detectionQualitativeUpdated risk estimates

Identifiers

PMID41606535
PMCPMC12924285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.