Literature DB >> 21723312

How do we achieve informed choice for women considering breast screening?

Jolyn Hersch1, Jesse Jansen, Les Irwig, Alexandra Barratt, Hazel Thornton, Kirsten Howard, Kirsten McCaffery.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In current medical literature, mammography and other cancer screening programs are subject to controversy because of debate about the magnitude and nature of the benefits and harms. This paper discusses the issues around informed choice for women considering breast screening.
METHOD: We discuss qualitative and quantitative studies of women's attitudes to breast screening and informed choice.
RESULTS: Women view breast screening as a way of avoiding potential regret, and reassurance from normal results is highly valued. Screening participants acknowledge anxiety about false positives but awareness regarding potential overdetection of indolent breast cancer is minimal, and research is needed to assess how better understanding of screening downsides may affect women's views. In any case, weighing up screening advantages and disadvantages is sensitive to personal preferences.
CONCLUSIONS: Communicators have an ethical obligation to make balanced information available to women, which is flexible enough to respond to the level of detail and involvement desired by each individual. Many women want to know more and to participate more actively in screening decisions. Techniques have been developed to present balanced information and support individual decision making in ways that are accessible and empowering for the wider community. Evaluations of breast cancer screening must integrate clinical data with evidence on the perspectives of women themselves.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21723312     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.06.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  10 in total

1.  Performance of 4 years of population-based mammography screening for breast cancer combined with ultrasound in Tyrol / Austria.

Authors:  Sabine Geiger-Gritsch; Martin Daniaux; Wolfgang Buchberger; Rudolf Knapp; Willi Oberaigner
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 1.704

2.  Explaining variations in breast cancer screening across European countries.

Authors:  Ansgar Wübker
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2013-06-07

3.  Perceptions of Conflicting Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations Among Racially/Ethnically Diverse Women: a Multimethod Study.

Authors:  Ashley J Housten; Diana S Hoover; Maggie Britton; Therese B Bevers; Richard L Street; Lorna H McNeill; Larkin L Strong; Jolyn Hersch; Kirsten McCaffery; Robert J Volk
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 6.473

4.  Perceptions of Prostate Cancer Screening Controversy and Informed Decision Making: Implications for Development of a Targeted Decision Aid for Unaffected Male First-Degree Relatives.

Authors:  Clement K Gwede; Stacy N Davis; Shaenelle Wilson; Mitul Patel; Susan T Vadaparampil; Cathy D Meade; Brian M Rivers; Daohai Yu; Javier Torres-Roca; Randy Heysek; Philippe E Spiess; Julio Pow-Sang; Paul Jacobsen
Journal:  Am J Health Promot       Date:  2014-06-26

5.  The role of communication in breast cancer screening: a qualitative study with Australian experts.

Authors:  Lisa M Parker; Lucie Rychetnik; Stacy M Carter
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  Doctors' approaches to PSA testing and overdiagnosis in primary healthcare: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Kristen Pickles; Stacy M Carter; Lucie Rychetnik
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-03-17       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Personalised informed choice on evidence and controversy on mammography screening: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Anna Roberto; Cinzia Colombo; Giulia Candiani; Livia Giordano; Paola Mantellini; Eugenio Paci; Roberto Satolli; Mario Valenza; Paola Mosconi
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Women's views on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Jolyn Hersch; Jesse Jansen; Alexandra Barratt; Les Irwig; Nehmat Houssami; Kirsten Howard; Haryana Dhillon; Kirsten McCaffery
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-01-23

9.  Women's responses to information about overdiagnosis in the UK breast cancer screening programme: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Jo Waller; Elaine Douglas; Katriina L Whitaker; Jane Wardle
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-04-22       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Home visits to improve breast health knowledge and screening practices in a less privileged area in Jordan.

Authors:  Hana Taha; Lennarth Nyström; Raeda Al-Qutob; Vanja Berggren; Hamideh Esmaily; Rolf Wahlström
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 3.295

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.