Literature DB >> 19403452

Underestimation of breast cancer risk: influence on screening behavior.

Maria C Katapodi1, Marylin J Dodd, Kathryn A Lee, Noreen C Facione.   

Abstract

PURPOSE/
OBJECTIVES: To describe perceived breast cancer risk, identify the percentage of women with inaccurate risk perceptions, and examine the influence of perceived and objective risk on screening behavior.
DESIGN: Descriptive, correlational, cross-sectional.
SETTING: Community settings in a metropolitan area on the western coast of the United States. SAMPLE: Multicultural sample of 184 English-speaking women (57% non-Caucasian, X age = 47 +/- 12 years) who have never been diagnosed with cancer.
METHODS: Two perceived risk scales (verbal and comparative) and the Gail model were used to assess perceived and objective breast cancer risk, respectively. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Perceived breast cancer risk, objective breast cancer risk, screening behavior.
FINDINGS: Participants reported that they "probably will not" get breast cancer and that their risk was "somewhat lower" than average. Family history of breast cancer was a significant predictor of perceived risk. Demographic characteristics and objective risk factors were not associated with perceived risk. Most women at high risk for breast cancer (89%) underestimated their actual risk; fewer women with low to average risk for breast cancer (9%) overestimated their risk. Age, Gail scores, and health insurance status promoted breast cancer screening; underestimation of risk had the opposite effect.
CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate perceptions of risk do not promote optimal breast cancer screening. The finding has implications for most women at high risk for developing breast cancer who underestimate their risk. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Oncology nurses can use risk assessment tools to provide individualized counseling regarding breast cancer risk factors and screening. Women at high risk who underestimate their risk could benefit from additional screening and from advances in cancer chemoprevention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19403452     DOI: 10.1188/09.ONF.306-314

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum        ISSN: 0190-535X            Impact factor:   2.172


  23 in total

1.  Women with Family History of Breast Cancer: How Much Are They Aware of Their Risk?

Authors:  Memnun Seven; Gülcan Bağcivan; Aygul Akyuz; Ferdağ Bölükbaş
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Correlates of family health history discussions between college students and physicians: does family cancer history make a difference?

Authors:  Matthew Lee Smith; Erica T Sosa; Angela K Hochhalter; Julie Covin; Marcia G Ory; E Lisako J McKyer
Journal:  J Prim Prev       Date:  2011-12

3.  Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Among Low-Income Women of Color in Primary Care: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Emily E Anderson; Silvia Tejeda; Kimberly Childers; Melinda R Stolley; Richard B Warnecke; Kent F Hoskins
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2015-06-02       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Great Expectations: HIV Risk Behaviors and Misperceptions of Low HIV Risk among Incarcerated Men.

Authors:  C E Golin; B G Barkley; C Biddell; D A Wohl; D L Rosen
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2018-06

5.  Psychometric testing of the decisional conflict scale: genetic testing hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Maria C Katapodi; Michelle L Munro; Penny F Pierce; Reg A Williams
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.381

6.  Correlates of unrealistic risk beliefs in a nationally representative sample.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; William M P Klein; Richard P Moser; Mandi Yu; William R Waldron; Timothy S McNeel; Andrew N Freedman
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2010-11-26

7.  Examining perceived cancer risk among patients with neurofibromatosis type 1.

Authors:  Elyse R Park; Kelly B Smith; Vanessa L Merker; Alona Muzikansky; Ana-Maria Vranceanu; Daphne L Wang; Scott R Plotkin
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  Protocol for population testing of an Internet-based Personalised Decision Support system for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Carlene J Wilson; Ingrid H K Flight; Ian T Zajac; Deborah Turnbull; Graeme P Young; Stephen R Cole; Tess Gregory
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-09-16       Impact factor: 2.796

9.  Risk perceptions and health behavior.

Authors:  Rebecca Ferrer; William M Klein
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2015-10-01

10.  Relationships of Family History-related Factors and Causal Beliefs to Cancer Risk Perception and Mammography Screening Adherence Among Medically Underserved Women.

Authors:  Soo Jung Hong; Melody Goodman; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2020-07-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.