Literature DB >> 24295939

The density conundrum: does legislation help or hurt?

Mary Lou Smith1.   

Abstract

Breast density and breast density legislation are controversial and potentially emotional issues in breast screening. Informing individual patients of their breast density status is an extremely important and highly personal conversation that must focus on patients' specific situations. The unanswered questions about converting population risk make it difficult to provide an individual woman with an explanation of what breast density means to her individual risk for developing breast cancer now or in the future. There are no standards or guidelines for what doctors should tell patients about their risk with dense breasts, and legislating the conversation may not improve it or a woman's response to the information. It is necessary to learn more about breast density, understand its meaning, and communicate clearly and compassionately with patients about what we know and what we do not know about breast cancer risk. Precipitous legislation can, in fact, undermine both the patient-physician relationship and the need for more evidence that would expand our understanding of the risk associated with breast density.
Copyright © 2013 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dense breasts; legislation; mammography; patient-physician communication; screening

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24295939     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.09.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  6 in total

1.  Challenges With Identifying Indication for Examination in Breast Imaging as a Key Clinical Attribute in Practice, Research, and Policy.

Authors:  Julie E Weiss; Martha Goodrich; Kimberly A Harris; Rachael E Chicoine; Marie B Synnestvedt; Steve J Pyle; Jane S Chen; Sally D Herschorn; Elisabeth F Beaber; Jennifer S Haas; Anna N A Tosteson; Tracy Onega
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 5.532

2.  A web-based personalized risk communication and decision-making tool for women with dense breasts: Design and methods of a randomized controlled trial within an integrated health care system.

Authors:  Sarah Knerr; Karen J Wernli; Kathleen Leppig; Kelly Ehrlich; Amanda L Graham; David Farrell; Chalanda Evans; George Luta; Marc D Schwartz; Suzanne C O'Neill
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2017-02-28       Impact factor: 2.226

3.  Physician Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Breast Density.

Authors:  Jordonna Brown; Chloe Soukas; Jenny J Lin; Laurie Margolies; Marimer Santiago-Rivas; Lina Jandorf
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts.

Authors:  Brian L Sprague; Natasha K Stout; Clyde Schechter; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Mucahit Cevik; Oguzhan Alagoz; Christoph I Lee; Jeroen J van den Broek; Diana L Miglioretti; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Harry J de Koning; Karla Kerlikowske; Constance D Lehman; Anna N A Tosteson
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Explaining between-race differences in African-American and European-American women's responses to breast density notification.

Authors:  Mark Manning; Terrance L Albrecht; Zeynep Yilmaz-Saab; Louis Penner; Andria Norman; Kristen Purrington
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Subjective Versus Quantitative Methods of Assessing Breast Density.

Authors:  Wijdan Alomaim; Desiree O'Leary; John Ryan; Louise Rainford; Michael Evanoff; Shane Foley
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-21
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.