» Articles » PMID: 15331867

Do Women Understand the Odds? Risk Perceptions and Recall of Risk Information in Women with a Family History of Breast Cancer

Overview
Journal Community Genet
Publisher Karger
Specialty Health Services
Date 2004 Aug 28
PMID 15331867
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To describe and compare women's risk perceptions and recall of breast cancer risk information in a cohort of first-time attendees at a family history clinic.

Methods: We conducted a 1-year prospective study of 158 women aged 18-45 years with a confirmed lifetime risk of breast cancer of 1 in 6 or greater. Risk perception and recall were assessed using a self-report questionnaire, completed pre-counselling and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months post-counselling, and through interviews conducted at 3 and 12 months.

Results: The proportion of women with accurate personal risk perceptions based on 'gambling' odds ('1 chance in x') significantly improved after risk counselling from 12% pre-counselling to 67% 3 months post-counselling (p < 0.001), which was maintained for 1 year. This was the method of reporting perceived risk associated with the best level of risk accuracy and the women's preferred format for describing risk, but the concept of lifetime risk was understood by only 44% of women. Qualitative risk categories ('high', moderate' or 'low') correlated significantly with women's self-reported odds values, but each category comprised a wide range of women's perceived numeric risks. Describing risk as the 'likelihood of breast cancer' resulted in a broad and somewhat inaccurate reporting of risk, compared with numeric ratings made at the same time. There was an increase of up to 4-fold in the proportion of women who failed to recall their risk value over time, and women were unable to accurately put the breast cancer risk in context compared with other health threats.

Conclusions: All methods of describing risk have limitations, but the results of the present study provide good support for women's accurate recall of numeric risk values and their preference for use of these 'gambling' odds. This may have been influenced by consistency of the use of this method both in risk communication and in personal summary letters. Descriptive risk formats reflected higher levels of perceived vulnerability to breast cancer, and genetic counsellors need to be aware of these different perceptions.

Citing Articles

Long-Term Evaluation of Women Referred to a Breast Cancer Family History Clinic (Manchester UK 1987-2020).

Howell A, Gandhi A, Howell S, Wilson M, Maxwell A, Astley S Cancers (Basel). 2020; 12(12).

PMID: 33317064 PMC: 7763143. DOI: 10.3390/cancers12123697.


Do Preferred Risk Formats Lead to Better Understanding? A Multicenter Controlled Trial on Communicating Familial Breast Cancer Risks Using Different Risk Formats.

Henneman L, van Asperen C, Oosterwijk J, Menko F, Claassen L, Timmermans D Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020; 14:333-342.

PMID: 32109999 PMC: 7036980. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S232941.


Telephone versus in-person colorectal cancer risk and screening intervention for first-degree relatives: A randomized controlled trial.

Esplen M, Harrington S, Leung Y, Aronson M, Rothenmund H, Semotiuk K Cancer. 2019; 125(13):2272-2282.

PMID: 30861097 PMC: 6742581. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32032.


Family Communication, Risk Perception and Cancer Knowledge of Young Adults from BRCA1/2 Families: a Systematic Review.

Young A, Butow P, Vetsch J, Quinn V, Patenaude A, Tucker K J Genet Couns. 2017; 26(6):1179-1196.

PMID: 28667568 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0125-4.


The effectiveness of a graphical presentation in addition to a frequency format in the context of familial breast cancer risk communication: a multicenter controlled trial.

Henneman L, Oosterwijk J, van Asperen C, Menko F, Ockhuysen-Vermey C, Kostense P BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013; 13:55.

PMID: 23627498 PMC: 3644257. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-55.