IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v21y2001i3p231-240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Women’s Views on Breast Cancer Risk and Screening Mammography

Author

Listed:
  • E. Silverman

    (VA Outcomes Group, White River Junction, Vermont)

  • S. Woloshin

    (VA Outcomes Group, White River Junction, Vermont, the Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire, Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire)

  • L. M. Schwartz

    (VA Outcomes Group, White River Junction, Vermont, the Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire, Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire)

  • S. J. Byram

    (Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Batelle Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington)

  • H. G. Welch

    (VA Outcomes Group, White River Junction, Vermont, the Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire)

  • B. Fischhoff

    (Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)

Abstract

Background . To promote informed decision making about mammography, clinicians are urged to present women with complete, relevant information about breast cancer and screening. Understanding women’s current beliefs may help guide such efforts by uncovering misunderstandings, conceptual gaps, and areas of concern. Objective . The authors sought to learn how women view breast cancer, their personal risk of breast cancer, and how screening mammography affects that risk. Methods . Forty-one open-ended semistructured telephone interviews with women selected from a national database by quota sampling to ensure a wide range in demographics of the participants. Results . Almost all respondents viewed breast cancer as a uniformly progressive disease that begins in a silent curable form (typically found by mammograms) and, unless treated early, invariably grows, spreads, and kills. Some women felt that any abnormality found must be treated, even if it was not malignant. None had heard of potentially nonprogressive cancers, and when informed, most felt that the uncertain prognosis of such lesions reinforced the need to find and treat disease as soon as possible. Women expressed a wide range of views about their personal risk of breast cancer. Although some saw breast cancer as a central threat to their health, many others cited heart disease, other cancers, violence, and trauma as greater concerns. Most recognized the importance of “uncontrollable†factors for breast cancer such as age, sex, family history, and genetics. However, other “controllable†factors with little or no demonstrated link to breast cancer (e.g., smoking, diet, toxic exposures, “bad attitudes†) were given equal or greater prominence, suggesting that many women feel considerable personal responsibility for their level of breast cancer risk. Similarly, although women recognized that mammography was not perfect, almost all believed that failure to have mammograms put one at risk for premature and preventable death. When asked how mammography worked, almost all repeated the message that “early detection saves lives,†suggesting that advanced cancer (and perhaps most cancer deaths) reflected a failure of early detection. The belief in the benefit of early detection was so strong that some women advocated scaring other women into getting mammograms because it is “better to be safe than sorry.†Conclusions . Women view breast cancer as a uniformly progressive disease rarely curable unless caught early. The exaggerated importance many attribute to a variety of controllable factors in modifying personal risk and the “danger†seen in failing to have mammograms may lead women diagnosed with breast cancer to blame themselves.

Suggested Citation

  • E. Silverman & S. Woloshin & L. M. Schwartz & S. J. Byram & H. G. Welch & B. Fischhoff, 2001. "Women’s Views on Breast Cancer Risk and Screening Mammography," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(3), pages 231-240, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:3:p:231-240
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0102100308
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X0102100308?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ritesh Banerjee & Ethan Cohen-Cole & Giulio Zanella, 2007. "Demonstration effects in preventive care," Supervisory Research and Analysis Working Papers QAU07-7, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:3:p:231-240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.