Literature DB >> 30066118

How Do Women View Risk-Based Mammography Screening? A Qualitative Study.

Xiaofei He1, Karen E Schifferdecker2,3, Elissa M Ozanne4, Anna N A Tosteson2,5, Steven Woloshin2,3,5, Lisa M Schwartz2,3,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Decades of persuasive messages have reinforced the importance of traditional screening mammography at regular intervals. A potential new paradigm, risk-based screening, adjusts mammography frequency based on a woman's estimated breast cancer risk in order to maximize mortality reduction while minimizing false positives and overdiagnosis. Women's views of risk-based screening are unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To explore women's views and personal acceptability of a potential risk-based mammography screening paradigm.
DESIGN: Four semi-structured focus group discussions about screening mammography and surveys before provision of information about risk-based screening. We analyzed coded focus group transcripts using a mixed deductive (content analysis) and inductive (grounded theory) approach. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 29 women (40-74 years old) with no personal history of breast cancer recruited by print and online media in New Hampshire and Vermont.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven out of 29 women reported having undergone mammography screening. All participants were white and most were highly educated. Some women accepted the idea that early cancer detection with traditional screening was beneficial-although many also reported hearing inconsistent recommendations from clinicians and mixed messages from media reports about mammography. Some women were familiar with a risk-based screening paradigm (primarily related to cervical cancer, n = 8) and thought matching screening mammography frequency to personal risk made sense (n = 8). Personal acceptability of risk-based screening was mixed. Some believed risk-based screening could reduce the harms of false positives and overdiagnosis (n = 7). Others thought screening less often might result in missing a dangerous diagnosis (n = 14). Many (n = 18) expressed concerns about the feasibility of risk-based screening and questioned whether breast cancer risk estimates could be accurate. Some suspected that risk-based mammography was motivated by a desire to save money (n = 6).
CONCLUSION: Some women thought risk-based screening made sense. Willingness to abandon traditional screening for the new paradigm was mixed. Broad acceptability of risk-based screening will require clearer communication about its rationale and feasibility and consistent messages from the health care team.

Entities:  

Keywords:  health communication; over-diagnosis; risk-based screening mammography

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30066118      PMCID: PMC6206346          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-018-4601-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  36 in total

1.  The benefits and harms of mammography screening: understanding the trade-offs.

Authors:  Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-01-13       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 2.  Screening mammography: update and review of publications since our report in the New England Journal of Medicine on the magnitude of the problem in the United States.

Authors:  Archie Bleyer
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  A multilevel study of socioeconomic predictors of regular mammography use among African-American women.

Authors:  Lynn Rosenberg; Lauren A Wise; Julie R Palmer; Nicholas J Horton; Lucile L Adams-Campbell
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Mammography decision making: Trends and predictors of provider communication in the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2011 to 2014.

Authors:  Laura M Spring; Megan R Marshall; Erica T Warner
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Practice Bulletin Number 179: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average-Risk Women.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 6.  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 7.  Use of patient decision aids increased younger women's reluctance to begin screening mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ilya Ivlev; Erin N Hickman; Marian S McDonagh; Karen B Eden
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Walking the tightrope: communicating overdiagnosis in modern healthcare.

Authors:  Kirsten J McCaffery; Jesse Jansen; Laura D Scherer; Hazel Thornton; Jolyn Hersch; Stacy M Carter; Alexandra Barratt; Stacey Sheridan; Ray Moynihan; Jo Waller; John Brodersen; Kristen Pickles; Adrian Edwards
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-02-05

9.  Screening mammography beliefs and recommendations: a web-based survey of primary care physicians.

Authors:  Shagufta Yasmeen; Patrick S Romano; Daniel J Tancredi; Naomi H Saito; Julie Rainwater; Richard L Kravitz
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-02-06       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Awareness of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force recommended changes in mammography screening guidelines, accuracy of awareness, sources of knowledge about recommendations, and attitudes about updated screening guidelines in women ages 40-49 and 50+.

Authors:  Marc T Kiviniemi; Jennifer L Hay
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  12 in total

1.  Capsule Commentary on He et al., How Do Women View Risk-Based Mammography Screening? A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Lydia E Pace
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Knowledge and Perception of Breast Density, Screening Mammography, and Supplemental Screening: in Search of "Informed".

Authors:  Karen E Schifferdecker; Anna N A Tosteson; Celia Kaplan; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana S M Buist; Louise M Henderson; Dianne Johnson; Jill Jaworski; Gloria Jackson-Nefertiti; Kelly Ehrlich; Mary W Marsh; Lisa Vu; Tracy Onega; Karen J Wernli
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Women's perceptions of personalized risk-based breast cancer screening and prevention: An international focus group study.

Authors:  Linda Rainey; Anna Jervaeus; Louise S Donnelly; D Gareth Evans; Mattias Hammarström; Per Hall; Yvonne Wengström; Mireille J M Broeders; Daniëlle van der Waal
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 3.894

4.  The introduction of risk stratified screening into the NHS breast screening Programme: views from British-Pakistani women.

Authors:  Victoria G Woof; Helen Ruane; David P French; Fiona Ulph; Nadeem Qureshi; Nasaim Khan; D Gareth Evans; Louise S Donnelly
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 4.430

5.  Introducing a low-risk breast screening pathway into the NHS Breast Screening Programme: Views from healthcare professionals who are delivering risk-stratified screening.

Authors:  Victoria G Woof; Lorna McWilliams; Louise S Donnelly; Anthony Howell; D Gareth Evans; Anthony J Maxwell; David P French
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec

6.  Views of health professionals on risk-based breast cancer screening and its implementation in the Spanish National Health System: A qualitative discussion group study.

Authors:  Celmira Laza-Vásquez; Núria Codern-Bové; Àngels Cardona-Cardona; Maria José Hernández-Leal; Maria José Pérez-Lacasta; Misericòrdia Carles-Lavila; Montserrat Rué
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Experiences of Women Who Refuse Recall for Further Investigation of Abnormal Screening Mammography: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Wei-Ying Sung; Hui-Chuan Yang; I-Chen Liao; Yu-Ting Su; Fu-Husan Chen; Shu-Ling Chen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Extending screening intervals for women at low risk of breast cancer: do they find it acceptable?

Authors:  Lorna McWilliams; Victoria G Woof; Louise S Donnelly; Anthony Howell; D Gareth Evans; David P French
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2021-05-29       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  A Procedure for Eliciting Women's Preferences for Breast Cancer Screening Frequency.

Authors:  Emily Grayek; Yanran Yang; Baruch Fischhoff; Karen E Schifferdecker; Steven Woloshin; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana L Miglioretti; Anna N A Tosteson
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 2.749

10.  Risk stratified breast cancer screening: UK healthcare policy decision-making stakeholders' views on a low-risk breast screening pathway.

Authors:  Lorna McWilliams; Victoria G Woof; Louise S Donnelly; Anthony Howell; D Gareth Evans; David P French
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.