Psychological and genetic counseling implications for adolescent daughters of mothers with breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescent daughters of women with breast cancer (BC) are themselves at risk for heritable BC. Although some preliminary evidence suggests this group is at an increased risk for emotional problems, evidence is limited to studies with small samples and no comparison groups. This study examined psychological and family functioning, health attitudes and beliefs about genetic risks in adolescent females. A case-comparison design was used to compare 55 mother-daughter pairs in which the mother had been treated for BC (BC group) to 55 families from the general population (GP). Participants completed an assessment battery measuring perceptions of personal risk for BC and attitudes about gene testing for BC susceptibility, family functioning, and adolescent psychological adjustment. Based on manova, no significant differences were found between the two groups on measures of the psychological functioning. However, BC group adolescents reported significant (p < 0.01) worries about their future health and genetic risk for BC. About 68% of BC adolescents compared with 12% of GP adolescents reported being moderately to greatly concerned about their susceptibility to genetic mutations. Further, 85% of BC group adolescents believed they were susceptible to BC compared with 10% of GP adolescents. The results indicated no evidence of emotional, behavioral, or familial distress in these families. However, BC adolescents have significant worries about their future health. The results of this study demonstrate the need to develop a comprehensive model of care where accurate information about genetics and health risks can be provided. The adolescents also need support to help them cope and communicate with their mothers their worries about BC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".