MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997829650 · doi:10.1159/000055128

Risk Perception and Psychological Strain in Women with a Family History of Breast Cancer

2001· article· en· W1997829650 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Neise, Martina Rauchfuß, Stefan Paepke, Katharina Beier, W. Lichtenegger

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology Research and Treatment · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerRisk perceptionFamily historyDiseasePerceptionQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicineClinical psychologyPsychologyCancerFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The thinking in health psychology is that patients' willingness to adopt preventive health behavior is contingent on their perceiving an increased risk of disease and is influenced by accompanying psychological stress. In counseling women with a family history of breast cancer, physicians focus on encouraging the patient to undergo early detection examinations as recommended. Therefore, it is essential to examine how women in this risk group perceive their own chances of developing breast cancer and to assess the psychological effects of their situation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 129 women with at least one first or second degree relative who had developed breast cancer were enrolled in a questionnaire study. The object was to ascertain the extent to which these women may be expected to realistically estimate their own probability of contracting the disease and what influence risk perception and psychological strain have on their willingness to make use of diagnostic opportunities for early detection. Additionally, the effects on their physical and mental well-being were analyzed. RESULTS: Among the women of the study group, a family history of breast cancer did not always correlate with the subject's perception of an increased risk of contracting the disease compared. On the whole, the majority of the women overestimated their personal risk despite prior genetic counseling. Only slightly less than one quarter of the study group correctly estimated their risk; another quarter underestimated it. The majority of those women who exhibited an increased risk perception were also those who overestimated their probability of personally contracting the disease. They underwent recommended screening examinations significantly less often than women with a low risk perception. However, women subjected to intense psychological strain showed above-average participation in screening programs. CONCLUSIONS: Women with a family history of breast cancer often find it difficult to realistically estimate their own risk of contracting the disease. Increased risk perception had a negative effect on participation in recommended breast cancer screening. Therefore, an effort should be made to correct the patient's overestimation of her personal risk. Integrating psychological counseling in screening programs is essential considering that women from high-risk groups are subjected to increased psychological strain. Further studies are required to more precisely evaluate other psychosocial factors in the behavior of women in risk group toward screening.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology Research and TreatmentSame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207