Literature DB >> 14559757

Women's perception of the benefits of mammography screening: population-based survey in four countries.

Gianfranco Domenighetti1, Barbara D'Avanzo, Matthias Egger, Franco Berrino, Thomas Perneger, Paola Mosconi, Marcel Zwahlen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening programmes are often actively promoted to achieve high coverage, which may result in unrealistic expectations. We examined women's understanding of the likely benefits of mammography screening.
METHODS: Telephone survey of random samples of the female population aged > or =15 years in the US, UK, Italy, and Switzerland using three closed questions on the expected benefits of mammography screening.
RESULTS: A total of 5964 women were contacted and 4140 women (69%) participated. Misconceptions were widespread: a majority of women believed that screening prevents or reduces the risk of contracting breast cancer (68%), that screening at least halves breast cancer mortality (62%), and that 10 years of regular screening will prevent 10 or more breast cancer deaths per 1000 women (75%). In multivariate analysis higher number of correct answers was positively associated with higher educational status (odds ratio [OR] = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.25, 1.66) and negatively with having had a mammography in the last 2 years (OR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73, 1.01). Compared with US women (reference group) and Swiss women (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.18) respondents in Italy (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.74) and the UK (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.88) gave fewer correct answers.
CONCLUSION: In the US and three European countries a high proportion of women overestimated the benefits that can be expected from screening mammography. This finding raises doubts on informed consent procedures within breast cancer screening programmes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14559757     DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyg257

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  53 in total

1.  Content of invitations for publicly funded screening mammography.

Authors:  Karsten Juhl Jørgensen; Peter C Gøtzsche
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-03-04

2.  Examining screening mammography participation among women aged 40 to 74.

Authors:  Karena D Volesky; Paul J Villeneuve
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Disclosure and rationality: comparative risk information and decision-making about prevention.

Authors:  Peter H Schwartz
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2009

4.  Personalized medicine: identifying the appropriate patient through biomarkers in oncology.

Authors: 
Journal:  P T       Date:  2011-07

5.  [Cancer screening in the elderly: Explorative mixed methods study].

Authors:  Doris Dolezil; Annekathrin Haase; Kristine Jahnke; Jens Thonack; Christin Löffler; Carsten Oliver Schmidt; Jean-François Chenot
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 1.281

6.  The price of false beliefs: unrealistic expectations as a contributor to the health care crisis.

Authors:  Steven H Woolf
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2012 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.166

7.  Communicating with women about mammography.

Authors:  Berta M Geller; Jane Zapka; Solveig S-H Hofvind; Astrid Scharpantgen; Livia Giordano; Noriaki Ohuchi; Rachel Ballard-Barbash
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.037

8.  Informed decision making before initiating screening mammography: does it occur and does it make a difference?

Authors:  Larissa Nekhlyudov; Rong Li; Suzanne W Fletcher
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol.

Authors:  Eleanor Mann; A Toby Prevost; Simon Griffin; Ian Kellar; Stephen Sutton; Michael Parker; Simon Sanderson; Ann Louise Kinmonth; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Public knowledge of benefits of breast and prostate cancer screening in Europe.

Authors:  Gerd Gigerenzer; Jutta Mata; Ronald Frank
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-08-11       Impact factor: 13.506

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.