Measuring perceptions of breast cancer risk

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention

Volumn 15, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 1893-1898

  Levy, Andrea Gurmankin ^a,b   Shea, Judy ^c   Williams, Sankey V ^c   Quistberg, Alex ^c   Armstrong, Katrina ^c,d,e  

^a DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER RISK; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; DEMOGRAPHY; FAMILY HISTORY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; OVARY CANCER; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF REPORT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION; PHILADELPHIA; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; SELF DISCLOSURE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33750504623     PISSN: 10559965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0482     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Kash KM, Holland JC, Helper MS, Miller DG. Psychological distress and surveillance behaviors of women with a family history of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992;84:24-30.
2. King E, Rimer BK, Balshem A, Ross E, Seay J. Mammography-related beliefs of older women. J Aging Health 1993;5:82-100.
3. Harris RP, Fletcher SW, Gonzalez JJ, et al. Mammography and age: are we targeting the wrong women? A community survey of women and physicians. Cancer 1991;67:2010-4.
4. Lerman C, Rimer BK, Trick B, Balshem A, Engstrom PF. Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Prev Med 1990;19:279-90.
5. McCaul KD, Branstetter AD, Schroeder DM, Glasgow RE. What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review. Health Psychol 1996;15:423-9.
6. Aiken LS, West SG, Woodward CK, Reno RR. Health beliefs and compliance with mammography screening recommendations in asymptomatic women. Health Psychol 1994;13:122-9.
7. Cummings KM, Hellmann R, Emont SL. Correlates of participation in a worksite stop-smoking contest. J Behav Med 1988;11:267-77.
8. Klesges RC, Brown K, Pascale RW, Murphy M, Williams E, Cigrang JA. Factors associated with participation, attrition and outcome in a smoking cessation program at the workplace. Health Psychol 1988;7:575-89.
9. Kviz FJ, Crittenden KS, Belzer LJ, Warnecke RB. Psychosocial factors and enrollment in a televised smoking cessation program. Health Educ Q 1991;18:445-61.
10. Boney-McCoy S, Gibbons FX, Reis TJ, Gerrard M, Luus CA, Sufka AV. Perceptions of smoking risk as a function of smoking status. J Behav Med 1992;15:469-88.
11. Weinstein ND, Sandman P, Roberts N. Perceived susceptibility and self protective behavior: a field experiment to encourage home radon testing. Health Psychol 1991;10:25-33.
12. Price J. Perceptions of colorectal cancer in a socioeconomically disadvantaged population. J Community Health 1993;18:347-62.
13. Weinstein N, Sandman PM, Roberts NE. Determinants of self-protective behavior: home radon testing. J of Applied Social Psychology 1990;20:783-801.
14. Orbell S, Crombie I, Johnston G. Social cognition and social structure in the prediction of cervical screening uptake. Br J Health Psychol 1996;1:35-50.
15. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Covey J, Matthews E, Pill R. Presenting risk information-a review of the effects of "framing" and other manipulations on patient outcomes. J Health Commun 2001;6:61-82.
16. Johnson EJ, Hershey J, Meszaros J, Kunreuther H, Framing, probability distortions and insurance decisions. J Risk Uncertain 1993;7:35-51.
17. Lichtenstein S, Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Layman M, Combs B. Judged frequency of lethal events. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1978;4:551-78.
18. Rottenstreich Y, Hsee C. Money, kisses, and electric shocks: on the affective psychology of risk. Psychol Sci 2001;12:185-90.
19. Wright W, Bower G. Mood effects on subjective probability assessment. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1992;52:276-91.
20. Isen A, Patrick R. The effect of positive feelings on risk-taking: when the chips are down. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1983;31:194-202.
21. Johnson E, Tversky A. Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk. J Pers Soc Psychol 1983;45:20-31.
22. Schwarz N, Clore G. Mood, misattribution and judgments of well-being: informative and directive functions of affective states. J Pers Soc Psychol 1983;45:513-23.
23. Kavanagh D, Bower G. Mood and self-efficacy: impact of joy and sadness on perceived capabilities. Cognit Ther Res 1985;9:507-25.
24. Lerner J, Dacher K. Fear, anger, and risk. J Pers Soc Psychol 2001;8:146-59.
25. Lerner J, Gonzalez R, Small D, Fischoff B. Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism. A national field experiment. Psychol Sci 2003;14:144-50.
26. Lerman C, Lustbader E, Rimer B, Daly M, Miller S, Sands C, Balshem A. Effects of individualized breast cancer risk counseling: a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:286-92.
27. Lipkus I, Biradavolu M, Fenn K, Keller P, Rimer B. Informing women about their breast cancer risks: truth and consequences. Health Commun 2001;13:205-26.
28. Alexander N, Ross J, Sumner W, Nease R, Littenberg B. The effect of an educational intervention on the perceived risk of breast cancer. J Gen Intern Med 1995;11:92-7.
29. Lipkus I, Rimer B, Strigo T. Relationships among objective and subjective risk for breast cancer and mammography stages of change. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1996;5:1005-11.
30. Gurmankin AD, Domchek S, Stopfer J, Fels C, Armstrong K. Patients' resistance to risk information in genetic counseling for BRCA1/2. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:523-9.
31. Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Armstrong K. The message sent versus message received in hypothetical physician risk communications: exploring the gap. Risk Anal 2004;24:1337-47.
32. Cohn L, Macfarlane S, Yanez C, et al. Risk perception: differences between adolescents and adults. Health Psychol 1995;14:217-22.
33. Lerman C, Schwartz MD, Miller SM, Daly M, Sands C, Rimer BK. A randomized trial of breast cancer risk counseling: Interacting effects of counseling, educational level, and coping style. Health Psychol 1996;15:75-83.
34. Lipkus IM, Iden D, Terrenoire J, Feaganes JR. Relationships among breast cancer concern, risk perceptions, and interest in genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility among African-American women with and without a family history of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999;8:533-9.
35. Woloshin S, Schwartz L, Byram S, Hschhoff B, Welch HG. A new scale for assessing perceptions of chance: a validation study. Med Decis Making 2000;20:298-307.
36. Diefenbach M, Weinstein N, O'Reilly J. Scales for assessing perceptions of health hazard susceptibility. Health Educ Res 1993;8:181-92.
37. Woloshin S, Schwartz L, Black W, Welch G. Women's perceptions of breast cancer risk: how you ask matters. Med Decis Making 1999;19:221-9.
38. Schapira M, Davids SL, McAuliffe TL, Nattinger AB. Agreement between scales in the measurement of breast cancer risk perceptions. Risk Anal 2004;24:665-73.
39. Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
40. Lerman C, Kash K, Stefanek M. Younger women at increased risk for breast cancer: perceived risk, psychological well-being, and surveillance behavior. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;16:171-6.
41. HHS. Centers for Disease Control. Washington (District of Columbia): Centers for Disease Control; 2002.
42. Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989;81:1879-86.
43. Walter SD, Irwig LM. Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: a review. J Clin Epidemiol 1988;41:923-37.
44. Walter SD, Frommer DJ, Cook RJ. The estimation of sensitivity and specificity in colorectal cancer screening methods. Cancer Detect Prev 1991;15:465-9.
45. Fischhoff B, DeBruin W. Fifty-fifty = 50%. J Behav Decis Making 1999;12:149-63.
46. Fischhoff B, DeBruin W, Millstein S, Halpern-Felsher B. Verbal and numerical expressions of probability: "it's a fifty-fifty chance." Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 2000;81:115-31.
47. Loewenstein G, Weber E, Hsee C, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull 2001;127:267-86.
48. Lipkus I, Samsa G, Rimer BK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making 2001;21:37-44.
49. Budescu D, Wallsten T. Consistency in interpretation of probabilistic phrases. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1985;36:391-405.
50. Olson M, Budescu D. Patterns of preference for numerical and verbal probabilities. J Behav Decis Making 1997;10:117-31.
51. Beyth-Marom R, How probable is probable? A numerical translation of verbal probability expressions. Int J Forecast 1982;1:257-69.
52. Wallsten T, Budescu D, Papoport A, et al. Measuring the vague meanings of probability terms. J Exp Psychol Gen 1986;115:348-65.
53. Taylor KL, Shelby RA, Schwartz MD, et al. The impact of item order on ratings of cancer risk perception. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:654-9.