A focus group study on breast cancer risk presentation: one format does not fit all

被引:19
作者
Dorval, Michel [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Bouchard, Karine [2 ,3 ]
Chiquette, Jocelyne [2 ,3 ]
Glendon, Gord [4 ]
Maugard, Christine M. [5 ,6 ,7 ,8 ]
Dubuisson, Wilhelm [2 ]
Panchal, Seema [9 ,10 ]
Simard, Jacques [11 ,12 ]
机构
[1] Univ Laval, Fac Pharm, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
[2] Hop St Sacrement, Ctr Rech, CHU Quebec, URESP, Quebec City, PQ G1S 4L8, Canada
[3] Hop St Sacrement, Ctr Malad Sein Deschenes Fabia, CHU Quebec, Quebec City, PQ G1S 4L8, Canada
[4] Mt Sinai Hosp, Samuel Lunenfeld Res Inst, Ontario Canc Genet Network, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada
[5] Univ Montreal, CRCHUM, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[6] Univ Montreal, Dept Med, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada
[7] CHUM, Hotel Dieu, Serv Med Gen, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[8] Hop Univ Strasbourg, Lab Diagnost Genet, Strasbourg, France
[9] Mt Sinai Hosp, Familial Breast Canc Clin, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada
[10] Univ Toronto, Dept Med Genet & Microbiol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[11] Univ Laval, Fac Med, Dept Mol Med, Quebec City, PQ G1K 7P4, Canada
[12] CHUL, CHU Quebec, Ctr Rech, Lab Genom Canc, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
risk assessment; health communication; breast neoplasm; probabilities; qualitative research; preferences; OF-THE-ART; GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; BOADICEA MODEL; COMMUNICATION; NUMERACY; IMPACT; INFORMATION; UNCERTAINTY; PERCEPTIONS; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1038/ejhg.2012.248
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Identifying a strategy that would optimize both the communication and understanding of the individual breast cancer risk remains a considerable challenge. This study explored the preferences of women with a family history of breast cancer about six presentation formats of individual breast cancer risk, as calculated from a risk prediction model. Thirty-four unaffected women attending genetic counseling because of a family history of breast cancer participated in six focus groups conducted in Quebec City (2), Montreal (2) and Toronto (2), Canada. Six risk formats were presented for a fictitious case involving a 35-year-old woman (1-numerical: cumulative risk probabilities by age until 80 years; 2-risk curves: probabilities expressed in a risk curve that also provided a risk curve for a woman with no family history in first-degree relatives; 3-relative risk of breast cancer by age 80 years; 4 and 5-absolute risk of breast cancer and absolute chance of not developing breast cancer in the next 20 years; 6-qualitative: color-coded figure). Participants were asked to indicate their appreciation of each format. A group discussion followed during which participants commented on each format. The most and least appreciated formats were risk curves and relative risk, respectively. Overall, participants advocated the use of formats that combine quantitative, qualitative and visual features. Using a combination of approaches to communicate individual breast cancer risks could be associated with higher satisfaction of counselees. Given the increasing use of risk prediction models, it may be relevant to consider the preferences of both the counselee and the professional.
引用
收藏
页码:719 / 724
页数:6
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]   Assessing Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer: A Review of Risk Assessment Models [J].
Amir, Eitan ;
Freedman, Orit C. ;
Seruga, Bostjan ;
Evans, D. Gareth .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2010, 102 (10) :680-691
[2]   Design features of graphs in health risk communication: A systematic review [J].
Ancker, Jessica S. ;
Senathirajah, Yalini ;
Kukafka, Rita ;
Starren, Justin B. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2006, 13 (06) :608-618
[3]   Risk prediction models of breast cancer: a systematic review of model performances [J].
Anothaisintawee, Thunyarat ;
Teerawattananon, Yot ;
Wiratkapun, Chollathip ;
Kasamesup, Vijj ;
Thakkinstian, Ammarin .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2012, 133 (01) :1-10
[4]   The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers: updates and extensions [J].
Antoniou, A. C. ;
Cunningham, A. P. ;
Peto, J. ;
Evans, D. G. ;
Lalloo, F. ;
Narod, S. A. ;
Risch, H. A. ;
Eyfjord, J. E. ;
Hopper, J. L. ;
Southey, M. C. ;
Olsson, H. ;
Johannsson, O. ;
Borg, A. ;
Passini, B. ;
Radice, P. ;
Manoukian, S. ;
Eccles, D. M. ;
Tang, N. ;
Olah, E. ;
Anton-Culver, H. ;
Warner, E. ;
Lubinski, J. ;
Gronwald, J. ;
Gorski, B. ;
Tryggvadottir, L. ;
Syrjakoski, K. ;
Kallioniemi, O-P ;
Eerola, H. ;
Nevanlinna, H. ;
Pharoah, P. D. P. ;
Easton, D. F. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2008, 98 (08) :1457-1466
[5]   The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer [J].
Antoniou, AC ;
Pharoah, PPD ;
Smith, P ;
Easton, DF .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2004, 91 (08) :1580-1590
[6]   Re-conceptualizing Risk in Genetic Counseling: Implications for Clinical Practice [J].
Austin, Jehannine C. .
JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING, 2010, 19 (03) :228-234
[7]   Communicating cancer risk information: the challenges of uncertainty [J].
Bottorff, JL ;
Ratner, PA ;
Johnson, JL ;
Lovato, CY ;
Joab, SA .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 1998, 33 (01) :67-81
[8]   Health literacy, numeracy, and interpretation of graphical breast cancer risk estimates [J].
Brown, Sandra M. ;
Culver, Julie O. ;
Osann, Kathryn E. ;
MacDonald, Deborah J. ;
Sand, Sharon ;
Thornton, Andrea A. ;
Grant, Marcia ;
Bowen, Deborah J. ;
Metcalfe, Kelly A. ;
Burke, Harry B. ;
Robson, Mark E. ;
Friedman, Susan ;
Weitzel, Jeffrey N. .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2011, 83 (01) :92-98
[9]   The impact of genetic counselling about breast cancer risk on women's risk perceptions and levels of distress [J].
Cull, A ;
Anderson, EDC ;
Campbell, S ;
MacKay, J ;
Smyth, E ;
Steel, M .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1999, 79 (3-4) :501-508
[10]   Predictors of pessimistic breast cancer risk perceptions in a primary care population [J].
Davids, SL ;
Schapira, MM ;
McAuliffe, TL ;
Nattinger, AB .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2004, 19 (04) :310-315