Women's Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk: Are They Accurate?
Background: The objective was to compare women's personal estimates of their risk with objective breast cancer risk estimates and to describe the risk factors for breast cancer identified by women. Methods: Telephone survey of a random sample of 761 rural and urban women with no history of brea...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Canadian journal of public health 2003-11, Vol.94 (6), p.422-426 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 426 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 422 |
| container_title | Canadian journal of public health |
| container_volume | 94 |
| creator | Buxton, Jane A. Bottorff, Joan L. Balneaves, Lynda G. Richardson, Chris McCullum, Mary Ratner, Pamela A. Hack, Tom |
| description | Background: The objective was to compare women's personal estimates of their risk with objective breast cancer risk estimates and to describe the risk factors for breast cancer identified by women. Methods: Telephone survey of a random sample of 761 rural and urban women with no history of breast cancer. Survey instrument included measures of perceptions of lifetime risk for breast cancer for themselves and for the average woman, perceptions of risk factors that influenced their risk and the average woman's risk for breast cancer. Objective estimates of breast cancer risk were calculated using the Gail et al. algorithm. Descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression were used to analyze the data. Results: Women's estimates of their own lifetime risk for breast cancer were significantly higher than their Gail model risk estimates (mean difference=19%, p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/BF03405078 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6980131</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>41993736</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>41993736</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-14127953de1fee66a8725bb64fb89dca157b31069aad39485c47199791f09a513</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0d-LEzEQB_AgildPX3xXFuHu4GB1svm1Ec6jLZ4KBUUqPoZsOmu3bjc12T3of38pLa36FMJ8GGbmS8hLCm8pgHo3uQPGQYAqH5ER1QXkiiv5mIwAoMx5IdkZeRbjKn0ZU-wpOaNcARQcRuTmp19jdxWzbxgcbvrGdzHzdTYJaGOfTW3nMGTfm_j7fTYOmM2XuM3Gzg3B9nj7nDypbRvxxeE9Jz_uPs6nn_PZ109fpuNZ7rhgfU45LZQWbIG0RpTSlqoQVSV5XZV64SwVqmIUpLZ2wTQvheOKaq00rUFbQdk5-bDvuxmqNS4cdn2wrdmEZm3D1njbmH8rXbM0v_y9kboEynYNLg8Ngv8zYOzNuokO29Z26IdoFOWlFFIl-OY_uPJD6NJypmCgNBdKJnS9Ry74GAPWx0komF0k5hRJwq__nv1EDxkkcHEANjrb1iHdvIknJ3ghhNrt8GrvVrH34Vjn6VIpVckeAFZSmhQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>230794576</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Women's Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk: Are They Accurate?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Buxton, Jane A. ; Bottorff, Joan L. ; Balneaves, Lynda G. ; Richardson, Chris ; McCullum, Mary ; Ratner, Pamela A. ; Hack, Tom</creator><creatorcontrib>Buxton, Jane A. ; Bottorff, Joan L. ; Balneaves, Lynda G. ; Richardson, Chris ; McCullum, Mary ; Ratner, Pamela A. ; Hack, Tom</creatorcontrib><description>Background: The objective was to compare women's personal estimates of their risk with objective breast cancer risk estimates and to describe the risk factors for breast cancer identified by women. Methods: Telephone survey of a random sample of 761 rural and urban women with no history of breast cancer. Survey instrument included measures of perceptions of lifetime risk for breast cancer for themselves and for the average woman, perceptions of risk factors that influenced their risk and the average woman's risk for breast cancer. Objective estimates of breast cancer risk were calculated using the Gail et al. algorithm. Descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression were used to analyze the data. Results: Women's estimates of their own lifetime risk for breast cancer were significantly higher than their Gail model risk estimates (mean difference=19%, p<0.001). The women's personal breast cancer risk estimates were lower than estimates of risk for a hypothetical average woman (mean difference=-8%, p<0.001). Fifty percent of the sample reported a perceived risk estimate at least 15% above their Gail risk estimate. The risk factors for breast cancer most frequently identified included family history, nutrition/diet, smoking, lifestyle, environment, stress and age. Although the risk factors used to calculate the Gail model risk estimates were reported by some study participants, these women consistently identified only family history as their personal risk factor. Conclusion: Women have difficulty accurately estimating their breast cancer risk and identifying known risk factors for breast cancer. Individual risk information may be more useful in enhancing accurate risk perceptions than the "1 in 9" message. Objectif : Le but de cette étude était de comparer l'opinion des femmes sur leur risque personnel et le risque objectif de cancer du sein et de décrire les facteurs associés au cancer du sein signalés par les femmes. Méthodes : Sondage téléphonique avec un échantillon aléatoire composé de 761 femmes de milieux urbains et ruraux, sans antécédents familiaux de cancer du sein. Le sondage comportait des instruments de mesure des perceptions du risque individuel et collectif à long terme, ainsi que des perceptions des facteurs associés au risque. Les estimations objectives du risque de cancer du sein ont été calculées par l'algorithme de Gail et al. Les données ont été analysées au moyen de statistiques descriptives et par régression linéaire multiple. Résultats : Les estimations des femmes quant à leur propre risque de cancer du sein étaient considérablement plus élevées que le risque estimé par le modèle de Gail (différence moyenne = 19 %, p<0,001 ). Les estimations des femmes quant à leur risque personnel à long terme étaient inférieures à leurs estimations du risque collectif (différence moyenne = -8 %, p<0,001). Pour la moitié de l'échantillon, l'estimation du risque était de 15 % supérieure à celle obtenue par le modèle de Gail. Les facteurs les plus fréquemment associés étaient les antécédents familiaux, l'alimentation, le tabac, le mode de vie, l'environnement, le stress et l'âge. Bien que certaines répondantes aient signalé les facteurs de risque utilisés dans le calcul du modèle de Gail, ces femmes ont uniformément cité les antécédents familiaux comme seul facteur de risque personnel. Conclusion : On constate que les femmes estiment difficilement leur risque de cancer du sein, ainsi que les facteurs associés. Plus que le message « une sur neuf », le fait de présenter des informations individuelles sur le risque pourrait peut-être créer une perception plus juste du risque.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-4263</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1920-7476</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/BF03405078</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14700240</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CJPEA4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ottawa, ON: Canadian Public Health Association</publisher><subject>Adult ; Age ; Aged ; Attitude to Health ; Biological and medical sciences ; Breast cancer ; Breast Neoplasms - genetics ; Breast Neoplasms - psychology ; British Columbia ; Cancer screening ; Data Collection ; Disease risk ; Family history ; Female ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Health care ; Health risk assessment ; Humans ; Mammary gland diseases ; Medical research ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Predisposing factors ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Risk Factors ; Rural Population ; Self examination ; Tumors ; Urban Population ; Women ; Womens health</subject><ispartof>Canadian journal of public health, 2003-11, Vol.94 (6), p.422-426</ispartof><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Canadian Public Health Association Nov/Dec 2003</rights><rights>The Canadian Public Health Association 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-14127953de1fee66a8725bb64fb89dca157b31069aad39485c47199791f09a513</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-14127953de1fee66a8725bb64fb89dca157b31069aad39485c47199791f09a513</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41993736$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/41993736$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,804,886,27929,27930,53796,53798,58022,58255</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=15425571$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14700240$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Buxton, Jane A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bottorff, Joan L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balneaves, Lynda G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richardson, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCullum, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ratner, Pamela A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hack, Tom</creatorcontrib><title>Women's Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk: Are They Accurate?</title><title>Canadian journal of public health</title><addtitle>Can J Public Health</addtitle><description>Background: The objective was to compare women's personal estimates of their risk with objective breast cancer risk estimates and to describe the risk factors for breast cancer identified by women. Methods: Telephone survey of a random sample of 761 rural and urban women with no history of breast cancer. Survey instrument included measures of perceptions of lifetime risk for breast cancer for themselves and for the average woman, perceptions of risk factors that influenced their risk and the average woman's risk for breast cancer. Objective estimates of breast cancer risk were calculated using the Gail et al. algorithm. Descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression were used to analyze the data. Results: Women's estimates of their own lifetime risk for breast cancer were significantly higher than their Gail model risk estimates (mean difference=19%, p<0.001). The women's personal breast cancer risk estimates were lower than estimates of risk for a hypothetical average woman (mean difference=-8%, p<0.001). Fifty percent of the sample reported a perceived risk estimate at least 15% above their Gail risk estimate. The risk factors for breast cancer most frequently identified included family history, nutrition/diet, smoking, lifestyle, environment, stress and age. Although the risk factors used to calculate the Gail model risk estimates were reported by some study participants, these women consistently identified only family history as their personal risk factor. Conclusion: Women have difficulty accurately estimating their breast cancer risk and identifying known risk factors for breast cancer. Individual risk information may be more useful in enhancing accurate risk perceptions than the "1 in 9" message. Objectif : Le but de cette étude était de comparer l'opinion des femmes sur leur risque personnel et le risque objectif de cancer du sein et de décrire les facteurs associés au cancer du sein signalés par les femmes. Méthodes : Sondage téléphonique avec un échantillon aléatoire composé de 761 femmes de milieux urbains et ruraux, sans antécédents familiaux de cancer du sein. Le sondage comportait des instruments de mesure des perceptions du risque individuel et collectif à long terme, ainsi que des perceptions des facteurs associés au risque. Les estimations objectives du risque de cancer du sein ont été calculées par l'algorithme de Gail et al. Les données ont été analysées au moyen de statistiques descriptives et par régression linéaire multiple. Résultats : Les estimations des femmes quant à leur propre risque de cancer du sein étaient considérablement plus élevées que le risque estimé par le modèle de Gail (différence moyenne = 19 %, p<0,001 ). Les estimations des femmes quant à leur risque personnel à long terme étaient inférieures à leurs estimations du risque collectif (différence moyenne = -8 %, p<0,001). Pour la moitié de l'échantillon, l'estimation du risque était de 15 % supérieure à celle obtenue par le modèle de Gail. Les facteurs les plus fréquemment associés étaient les antécédents familiaux, l'alimentation, le tabac, le mode de vie, l'environnement, le stress et l'âge. Bien que certaines répondantes aient signalé les facteurs de risque utilisés dans le calcul du modèle de Gail, ces femmes ont uniformément cité les antécédents familiaux comme seul facteur de risque personnel. Conclusion : On constate que les femmes estiment difficilement leur risque de cancer du sein, ainsi que les facteurs associés. Plus que le message « une sur neuf », le fait de présenter des informations individuelles sur le risque pourrait peut-être créer une perception plus juste du risque.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Age</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Attitude to Health</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - psychology</subject><subject>British Columbia</subject><subject>Cancer screening</subject><subject>Data Collection</subject><subject>Disease risk</subject><subject>Family history</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health risk assessment</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mammary gland diseases</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Predisposing factors</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Rural Population</subject><subject>Self examination</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><subject>Urban Population</subject><subject>Women</subject><subject>Womens health</subject><issn>0008-4263</issn><issn>1920-7476</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpd0d-LEzEQB_AgildPX3xXFuHu4GB1svm1Ec6jLZ4KBUUqPoZsOmu3bjc12T3of38pLa36FMJ8GGbmS8hLCm8pgHo3uQPGQYAqH5ER1QXkiiv5mIwAoMx5IdkZeRbjKn0ZU-wpOaNcARQcRuTmp19jdxWzbxgcbvrGdzHzdTYJaGOfTW3nMGTfm_j7fTYOmM2XuM3Gzg3B9nj7nDypbRvxxeE9Jz_uPs6nn_PZ109fpuNZ7rhgfU45LZQWbIG0RpTSlqoQVSV5XZV64SwVqmIUpLZ2wTQvheOKaq00rUFbQdk5-bDvuxmqNS4cdn2wrdmEZm3D1njbmH8rXbM0v_y9kboEynYNLg8Ngv8zYOzNuokO29Z26IdoFOWlFFIl-OY_uPJD6NJypmCgNBdKJnS9Ry74GAPWx0komF0k5hRJwq__nv1EDxkkcHEANjrb1iHdvIknJ3ghhNrt8GrvVrH34Vjn6VIpVckeAFZSmhQ</recordid><startdate>20031101</startdate><enddate>20031101</enddate><creator>Buxton, Jane A.</creator><creator>Bottorff, Joan L.</creator><creator>Balneaves, Lynda G.</creator><creator>Richardson, Chris</creator><creator>McCullum, Mary</creator><creator>Ratner, Pamela A.</creator><creator>Hack, Tom</creator><general>Canadian Public Health Association</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><general>Springer International Publishing</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4S-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FQ</scope><scope>8FV</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M3G</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20031101</creationdate><title>Women's Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk: Are They Accurate?</title><author>Buxton, Jane A. ; Bottorff, Joan L. ; Balneaves, Lynda G. ; Richardson, Chris ; McCullum, Mary ; Ratner, Pamela A. ; Hack, Tom</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c453t-14127953de1fee66a8725bb64fb89dca157b31069aad39485c47199791f09a513</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Age</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Attitude to Health</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - psychology</topic><topic>British Columbia</topic><topic>Cancer screening</topic><topic>Data Collection</topic><topic>Disease risk</topic><topic>Family history</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health risk assessment</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mammary gland diseases</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Predisposing factors</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Rural Population</topic><topic>Self examination</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><topic>Urban Population</topic><topic>Women</topic><topic>Womens health</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Buxton, Jane A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bottorff, Joan L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balneaves, Lynda G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richardson, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCullum, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ratner, Pamela A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hack, Tom</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>BPIR.com Limited</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database</collection><collection>Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>CBCA Reference & Current Events</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Canadian journal of public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Buxton, Jane A.</au><au>Bottorff, Joan L.</au><au>Balneaves, Lynda G.</au><au>Richardson, Chris</au><au>McCullum, Mary</au><au>Ratner, Pamela A.</au><au>Hack, Tom</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Women's Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk: Are They Accurate?</atitle><jtitle>Canadian journal of public health</jtitle><addtitle>Can J Public Health</addtitle><date>2003-11-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>94</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>422</spage><epage>426</epage><pages>422-426</pages><issn>0008-4263</issn><eissn>1920-7476</eissn><coden>CJPEA4</coden><abstract>Background: The objective was to compare women's personal estimates of their risk with objective breast cancer risk estimates and to describe the risk factors for breast cancer identified by women. Methods: Telephone survey of a random sample of 761 rural and urban women with no history of breast cancer. Survey instrument included measures of perceptions of lifetime risk for breast cancer for themselves and for the average woman, perceptions of risk factors that influenced their risk and the average woman's risk for breast cancer. Objective estimates of breast cancer risk were calculated using the Gail et al. algorithm. Descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression were used to analyze the data. Results: Women's estimates of their own lifetime risk for breast cancer were significantly higher than their Gail model risk estimates (mean difference=19%, p<0.001). The women's personal breast cancer risk estimates were lower than estimates of risk for a hypothetical average woman (mean difference=-8%, p<0.001). Fifty percent of the sample reported a perceived risk estimate at least 15% above their Gail risk estimate. The risk factors for breast cancer most frequently identified included family history, nutrition/diet, smoking, lifestyle, environment, stress and age. Although the risk factors used to calculate the Gail model risk estimates were reported by some study participants, these women consistently identified only family history as their personal risk factor. Conclusion: Women have difficulty accurately estimating their breast cancer risk and identifying known risk factors for breast cancer. Individual risk information may be more useful in enhancing accurate risk perceptions than the "1 in 9" message. Objectif : Le but de cette étude était de comparer l'opinion des femmes sur leur risque personnel et le risque objectif de cancer du sein et de décrire les facteurs associés au cancer du sein signalés par les femmes. Méthodes : Sondage téléphonique avec un échantillon aléatoire composé de 761 femmes de milieux urbains et ruraux, sans antécédents familiaux de cancer du sein. Le sondage comportait des instruments de mesure des perceptions du risque individuel et collectif à long terme, ainsi que des perceptions des facteurs associés au risque. Les estimations objectives du risque de cancer du sein ont été calculées par l'algorithme de Gail et al. Les données ont été analysées au moyen de statistiques descriptives et par régression linéaire multiple. Résultats : Les estimations des femmes quant à leur propre risque de cancer du sein étaient considérablement plus élevées que le risque estimé par le modèle de Gail (différence moyenne = 19 %, p<0,001 ). Les estimations des femmes quant à leur risque personnel à long terme étaient inférieures à leurs estimations du risque collectif (différence moyenne = -8 %, p<0,001). Pour la moitié de l'échantillon, l'estimation du risque était de 15 % supérieure à celle obtenue par le modèle de Gail. Les facteurs les plus fréquemment associés étaient les antécédents familiaux, l'alimentation, le tabac, le mode de vie, l'environnement, le stress et l'âge. Bien que certaines répondantes aient signalé les facteurs de risque utilisés dans le calcul du modèle de Gail, ces femmes ont uniformément cité les antécédents familiaux comme seul facteur de risque personnel. Conclusion : On constate que les femmes estiment difficilement leur risque de cancer du sein, ainsi que les facteurs associés. Plus que le message « une sur neuf », le fait de présenter des informations individuelles sur le risque pourrait peut-être créer une perception plus juste du risque.</abstract><cop>Ottawa, ON</cop><pub>Canadian Public Health Association</pub><pmid>14700240</pmid><doi>10.1007/BF03405078</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0008-4263 |
| ispartof | Canadian journal of public health, 2003-11, Vol.94 (6), p.422-426 |
| issn | 0008-4263 1920-7476 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6980131 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Adult Age Aged Attitude to Health Biological and medical sciences Breast cancer Breast Neoplasms - genetics Breast Neoplasms - psychology British Columbia Cancer screening Data Collection Disease risk Family history Female Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics Health care Health risk assessment Humans Mammary gland diseases Medical research Medical sciences Middle Aged Predisposing factors Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine Risk Factors Rural Population Self examination Tumors Urban Population Women Womens health |
| title | Women's Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk: Are They Accurate? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-16T02%3A29%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Women's%20Perceptions%20of%20Breast%20Cancer%20Risk:%20Are%20They%20Accurate?&rft.jtitle=Canadian%20journal%20of%20public%20health&rft.au=Buxton,%20Jane%20A.&rft.date=2003-11-01&rft.volume=94&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=422&rft.epage=426&rft.pages=422-426&rft.issn=0008-4263&rft.eissn=1920-7476&rft.coden=CJPEA4&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/BF03405078&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E41993736%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=230794576&rft_id=info:pmid/14700240&rft_jstor_id=41993736&rfr_iscdi=true |