Perception and Counseling for Cardiac Health in Breast Cancer Survivors Using the Health Belief Model: Qualitative Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Breast cancer survivors have increased cardiovascular risk compared to those without cancer history. Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death in breast cancer survivors. Cardiovascular risk in breast cancer survivors is impacted by both cancer treatment-associated effects and in risk factors for breast cancer and cardiovascular disease overlap. Strategies to improve screening for and management of cardiovascular disease in breast cancer survivors are needed to improve the delivery of survivorship care. Objective: This study aims to assess current cardiovascular risk counseling practices and perceived cardiovascular risk in breast cancer survivors. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted from May to December 2021 with breast cancer survivors identified as having a primary care clinician within an academic family medicine center in Charleston, South Carolina. The interview guide and content were developed using the Health Belief Model with a focus on cardiovascular risk behaviors, risk perception, and barriers to risk reduction. Analysis of categorical data was conducted by frequency and quantitative variables by mean and SD. Template analysis was performed for qualitative analysis. Outcome measures included self-reported history of cardiovascular disease, risk perception, and risk behaviors. Results: The average age of participants (n=19) was 54 (SD 7) years; 68% (13/19) were White and 32% (6/19) were Black or African American. Of the interviewed women, 90% (17/19) reported a personal history and 90% (17/19) reported a family history of cardiovascular disease. Only 53% (10/19) had previously reported receipt of cardiovascular counseling. Primary care most commonly provided counseling, followed by oncology. Among breast cancer survivors, 32% (6/19) reported being at increased cardiovascular risk, and 47% (9/19) were unsure of their relative cardiovascular risk. Factors affecting perceived cardiovascular risk included family history, cancer treatments, cardiovascular diagnoses, and lifestyle factors. Video (15/19, 79%) and SMS text messaging (13/19, 68%) were the most highly reported mechanisms through which breast cancer survivors requested to receive additional information and counseling on cardiovascular risk and risk reduction. Commonly reported barriers to risk reduction such as physical activity included time for meal planning and exercise, resources to support dietary and exercise changes, physical limitations, and competing responsibilities. Barriers specific to survivorship status included concerns for immune status during the COVID-19 pandemic, physical limitations associated with cancer treatment, and psychosocial aspects of cancer survivorship. Conclusions: Breast cancer survivors identified that factors associated with their cancer diagnosis and treatment both impacted their cardiovascular risk and introduced additional barriers to risk reduction. Potential strategies to improve counseling and awareness around cardiovascular risk include video and messaging platforms. Further risk reduction strategies should consider the unique challenges of cancer survivorship in delivery and implementation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».