Literature DB >> 29373069

Preferences for Communicating about Breast Cancer Screening Among Racially/Ethnically Diverse Older Women.

Diana S Hoover1, Monique R Pappadis2,3, Ashley J Housten4, Shilpa Krishnan5, Susan C Weller6,7, Sharon H Giordano4,8, Therese B Bevers9, James S Goodwin2,10, Robert J Volk4.   

Abstract

Differences exist across breast cancer screening guidelines regarding frequency of screening and age of discontinuation for older women (≥70 years) at average risk for breast cancer. These differences highlight concerns about the benefits and harms of screening, and may negatively impact older women's ability to make informed screening decisions. This study examined preferences for communicating about screening mammography among racially/ethnically diverse, older women. In-depth interviews were conducted with 59 women with no breast cancer history. Non-proportional quota sampling ensured roughly equal numbers on age (70-74 years, ≥75 years), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic/Latina White, non-Hispanic/Latina Black, Hispanic/Latina), and education (≤high school diploma, >high school diploma). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo 10. Thematic analyses revealed that rather than being told to get mammograms, participants wanted to hear about the benefits and harms of screening mammography, including overdiagnosis. Participants recommended that this information be communicated via physicians or other healthcare providers, included in brochures/pamphlets, and presented outside of clinical settings (e.g., in senior groups). Results were consistent regardless of participants' age, race/ethnicity, or education. Findings revealed that older women desire information about the benefits and harms of screening mammography, and would prefer to learn this information through discussions with healthcare providers and multiple other formats.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29373069      PMCID: PMC6062485          DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2018.1431026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Commun        ISSN: 1041-0236


  17 in total

Review 1.  Whatever happened to qualitative description?

Authors:  M Sandelowski
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.228

Review 2.  Disparities in screening mammography. Current status, interventions and implications.

Authors:  Monica E Peek; Jini H Han
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  Overdiagnosis in cancer.

Authors:  H Gilbert Welch; William C Black
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-04-22       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Clinicians' Expectations of the Benefits and Harms of Treatments, Screening, and Tests: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Tammy C Hoffmann; Chris Del Mar
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 21.873

5.  Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Authors:  Albert L Siu
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  An approach to measuring the quality of breast cancer decisions.

Authors:  Karen Sepucha; Elissa Ozanne; Kerry Silvia; Ann Partridge; Albert G Mulley
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2006-10-04

7.  Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society.

Authors:  Kevin C Oeffinger; Elizabeth T H Fontham; Ruth Etzioni; Abbe Herzig; James S Michaelson; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Louise C Walter; Timothy R Church; Christopher R Flowers; Samuel J LaMonte; Andrew M D Wolf; Carol DeSantis; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Kimberly Andrews; Deana Manassaram-Baptiste; Debbie Saslow; Robert A Smith; Otis W Brawley; Richard Wender
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 8.  A systematic assessment of benefits and risks to guide breast cancer screening decisions.

Authors:  Lydia E Pace; Nancy L Keating
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 9.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-10-30       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Ten years of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration: evolution of the core dimensions for assessing the quality of patient decision aids.

Authors:  Robert J Volk; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Dawn Stacey; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 2.796

View more
  3 in total

1.  Resistance to discontinuing breast cancer screening in older women: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Ashley J Housten; Monique R Pappadis; Shilpa Krishnan; Susan C Weller; Sharon H Giordano; Therese B Bevers; Robert J Volk; Diana S Hoover
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 3.894

2.  Evaluation of a mammography decision aid for women 75 and older at risk for lower health literacy in a pretest-posttest trial.

Authors:  Tamara Cadet; Gianna Aliberti; Maria Karamourtopoulos; Alicia Jacobson; Elizabeth A Gilliam; Sara Primeau; Roger Davis; Mara A Schonberg
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2021-02-15

3.  Perceptions of overdetection of breast cancer among women 70 years of age and older in the USA: a mixed-methods analysis.

Authors:  Monique R Pappadis; Robert J Volk; Shilpa Krishnan; Susan C Weller; Elizabeth Jaramillo; Diana Stewart Hoover; Sharon H Giordano; Alai Tan; Kristin M Sheffield; Ashley J Housten; James S Goodwin
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 2.692

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.