Literature DB >> 31636127

Benefits and harms of selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) to reduce breast cancer risk: a cross-sectional study of methods to communicate risk in primary care.

Jennifer G McIntosh1, Jesse Minshall2, Sibel Saya1, Adrian Bickerstaffe3, Nadira Hewabandu3, Ashleigh Qama4, Jon D Emery5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In Australia, evidence-based guidelines recommend that women consider taking selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) to reduce their risk of breast cancer. In practice, this requires effective methods for communicating the harms and benefits of taking SERMs so women can make an informed choice. AIM: To evaluate how different risk presentations influence women's decisions to consider taking SERMs. DESIGN AND
SETTING: Cross-sectional, correlational study of Australian women in general practice.
METHOD: Three risk communication formats were developed that included graphics, numbers, and text to explain the reduction in breast cancer risk and risk of side effects for women taking SERMs (raloxifene or tamoxifen). Women aged 40-74 years in two general practices were shown the risk formats using vignettes of hypothetical women at moderate or high risk of breast cancer and asked to choose 'If this was you, would you consider taking a SERM?' Descriptive statistics and predictors (risk format, level of risk, and type of SERM) of choosing SERMs were determined by logistic regression.
RESULTS: A total of 288 women were recruited (an 88% response rate) between March and May 2017. The risk formats that showed a government statement and an icon array were associated with a greater likelihood of considering SERMs relative to one that showed a novel expected frequency tree. Risk formats for raloxifene and for the high-risk vignettes were also more strongly associated with choosing to consider SERMs. No associations were found with any patient demographics.
CONCLUSION: Specific risk formats may lead to more women considering taking SERMs to reduce breast cancer risk, especially if they are at high risk of the condition. Raloxifene may be a more acceptable SERM to patients. © British Journal of General Practice 2019.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast neoplasms; cancer; preventive therapy; primary care; raloxifene hydrochloride; tamoxifen

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31636127      PMCID: PMC6805163          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp19X706841

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  33 in total

1.  Reducing aversion to side effects in preventive medical treatment decisions.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Neil D Weinstein; Graham A Colditz; Karen M Emmons
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl       Date:  2007-03

Review 2.  A meta-analysis of the effects of presenting treatment benefits in different formats.

Authors:  Judith Covey
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2007-09-14       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 3.  Barriers to the Use of Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Therapies.

Authors:  Arvind Bambhroliya; Mariana Chavez-MacGregor; Abenaa M Brewster
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 11.908

Review 4.  Evidence-based risk communication: a systematic review.

Authors:  Daniella A Zipkin; Craig A Umscheid; Nancy L Keating; Elizabeth Allen; KoKo Aung; Rebecca Beyth; Scott Kaatz; Devin M Mann; Jeremy B Sussman; Deborah Korenstein; Connie Schardt; Avishek Nagi; Richard Sloane; David A Feldstein
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Who profits from visual aids: overcoming challenges in people's understanding of risks [corrected].

Authors:  Rocio Garcia-Retamero; Mirta Galesic
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Helping Doctors and Patients Make Sense of Health Statistics.

Authors:  Gerd Gigerenzer; Wolfgang Gaissmaier; Elke Kurz-Milcke; Lisa M Schwartz; Steven Woloshin
Journal:  Psychol Sci Public Interest       Date:  2007-11-01

7.  Women's decisions regarding tamoxifen for breast cancer prevention: responses to a tailored decision aid.

Authors:  Angela Fagerlin; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Vijayan Nair; Holly A Derry; Jennifer B McClure; Sarah Greene; Azadeh Stark; Sharon Hensley Alford; Paula Lantz; Daniel F Hayes; Cheryl Wiese; Sarah Claud Zweig; Rosemarie Pitsch; Aleksandra Jankovic; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  Does labeling prenatal screening test results as negative or positive affect a woman's responses?

Authors:  Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Angela Fagerlin; Kristie Keeton; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-09-19       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Uptake of exemestane chemoprevention in postmenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Bilge Aktas; Mia Sorkin; Lajos Pusztai; Erin W Hofstatter
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 10.  Presenting quantitative information about decision outcomes: a risk communication primer for patient decision aid developers.

Authors:  Lyndal J Trevena; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Adrian Edwards; Wolfgang Gaissmaier; Mirta Galesic; Paul K J Han; John King; Margaret L Lawson; Suzanne K Linder; Isaac Lipkus; Elissa Ozanne; Ellen Peters; Danielle Timmermans; Steven Woloshin
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 2.796

View more
  3 in total

1.  Benefits and harms of aspirin to reduce colorectal cancer risk: a cross-sectional study of methods to communicate risk in primary care.

Authors:  Peter Nguyen; Jennifer McIntosh; Adrian Bickerstaffe; Sanjaya Maddumarachchi; Kara-Lynne Cummings; Jon D Emery
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  Identifying women with increased risk of breast cancer and implementing risk-reducing strategies and supplemental imaging.

Authors:  Suneela Vegunta; Asha A Bhatt; Sadia A Choudhery; Sandhya Pruthi; Aparna S Kaur
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 4.239

3.  Commentary: Pivoting during a pandemic: developing a new recruitment model for a randomised controlled trial in response to COVID-19.

Authors:  Shakira Milton; Jennifer McIntosh; Lucy Boyd; Napin Karnchanachari; Finlay Macrae; Jon David Emery
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 2.279

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.