Fear of cancer recurrence in breast cancer survivors carrying a <i>BRCA1/2</i> mutation: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is preliminary evidence suggesting that FCR is a major problem for breast cancer survivors carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation. The goal of this qualitative study, conducted among women who were treated for breast cancer, was to provide a deeper understanding of how FCR is experienced in the context of a genetic predisposition to breast cancer. METHOD: Three focus groups (90-110 min) were conducted with 19 breast cancer survivors carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation. The semistructured interview probed FCR level and impact, the role FCR played in the decision to have a prophylactic bilateral mastectomy and/or salpingo-oophorectomy, the effect that surgery had on FCR, and the relevance of offering a psychological intervention targeting FCR to this population. RESULTS: Findings indicated that FCR was a significant issue in these women, even though a majority had undergone a prophylactic surgery. Patients strongly affirmed the need to develop and provide access to FCR interventions that are specifically adapted to the needs of this group. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that, although being the most effective medical option to reduce the actual risk of local recurrence (or second breast cancer), prophylactic surgery only partially reduces FCR. A psychological intervention targeting specifically FCR would be an appropriate complement to preventive surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".