Toward a new understanding of risk perception among young female BRCA1/2 "previvors"

Families, Systems and Health

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 32-46

  Hoskins, Lindsey M ^a   Roy, Kevin M ^b   Greene, Mark H ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

BRCA1; BRCA2; Breast ovarian cancer risk; Gene mutation; Qualitative research; Risk perception

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BREAST TUMOR; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS; HUMAN; MUTATION; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; OVARY TUMOR; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOLOGIC TEST; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RISK ASSESSMENT; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENE; UNITED STATES; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; GENES, BRCA1; GENES, BRCA2; GENETIC TESTING; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTERVIEW, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MUTATION; NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE (U.S.); OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PERCEPTION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNITED STATES; WOMEN'S HEALTH; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84860380025     PISSN: 10917527     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0027276     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Absetz, P., Aro, A. R., & Sutton, S. R. (2003). Experience with breast cancer, pre-screening perceived susceptibility and the psychological impact of screening. Psycho-Oncology, 12, 305-318. doi:10.1002/pon.644
2. Ayyappan, A. P., Kulkarni, S., & Crystal, P. (2010). Pregnancy-associated breast cancer: Spectrum of imaging appearances. British Journal of Radiology, 83, 529-534. doi:10.1259/bjr/17982822
3. Clark, A. S., & Domchek, S. M. (2011). Clinical management of hereditary breast cancer syndrome. Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia, 16, 17-25. doi:10.1007/s10911-011-9200-x
4. d'Agincourt-Canning, L. (2005). The effect of experiential knowledge on construction of risk perception in hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 14, 55-69. doi:10.1007/s10897-005-1500-0
5. Daly, K. J. (2007). Qualitative methods for family studies and human development. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
6. Die-Trill, M. (2000). Beliefs about cancer causation and their influence on family function. In L. Baider, C.L. Cooper & A. Kaplan-DeNour (Eds.), Cancer and the Family (2nd ed., pp. 119-133). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
7. Gierach, G. L., Loud, J. T., Chow, C. K., Prindiville, S. A., Eng-Wong, J., et al. (2010). Mammographic density does not differ between unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women and lowto-average risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 123, 245-255. doi:10.1007/s10549-010-0749-7
8. Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
9. Hopwood, P., Howell, A., Lalloo, F., & Evans, G. (2003). Do women understand the odds? Risk perceptions and recall of risk information in women with a family history of breast cancer. Community Genetics, 6, 214-223. doi:10.1159/000079383
10. Hoskins, L. M. (2010). Negotiation of health risks and risk management for young adult BRCA1/2- positive women: Implications for partnering and family formation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland, College Park.
11. Hoskins, L. M., Roy, K., Peters, J. A., Loud, J. T., & Greene, M. H. (2008). Disclosure of positive BRCA1/2-mutation status in young couples: The journey from uncertainty to bonding through partner support. Families, Systems, & Health, 26, 296-316. doi:10.1037/a0012914
12. Kelly, K. M., Leventhal, H., Andrydowski, M., Toppmeyer, D., Much, J., Dermody, J., et al. (2005). Using the common sense model to understand perceived cancer risk in individuals testing for BRCA1/2 mutations. Psycho-Oncology, 14, 34- 48. doi:10.1002/pon.805
13. Kenen, R., & Peters, J. (2001). The Colored, Eco- Genetic Relationship Map (CEGRM): A conceptual approach and tool for genetic counseling research. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 10, 289-309. doi:10.1023/A:1016627426430
14. Klein, W. M. P., & Stefanek, M. E. (2007). Cancer risk elicitation and communication: Lessons from the psychology of risk perception. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 57, 147-167. doi:10.3322/canjclin.57.3.147
15. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16. Mauksch, L. B., Dugdale, D. C., Dodson, S., & Epstein, R. (2008). Relationship, communication, and efficiency in the medical encounter: Creating a clinical model from a literature review. Archives of Internal Medicine, 168, 1387-1395. doi:10.1001/archinte.168.13.1387
17. Mellon, S., Berry-Bobovski, L., Gold, R., Levin, N., & Tainsky, M. (2006). Communication and decision-making about seeking inherited cancer risk information: Findings from female survivorrelative focus groups. Psycho-Oncology, 15, 193- 208. doi:10.1002/pon.935
18. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Peters, J., Hoskins, L., Prindiville, S., Kenen, R., & Greene, M. H. (2006). Evolution of the Colored Eco-Genetic Relationship Map (CEGRM) for assessing social functioning in families. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 15, 477-489. doi:10.1007/s10897-006-9042-7
20. Price, M. A., Butow, P. N., Lo, S. K., Wilson, J., & KConFab. (2007). Preidctors of cancer worry in unaffected women from high risk breast cancer families: Risk perception is not the primary issue. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 16, 635-644. doi:10.1007/s10897-007-9105-4
21. Rolland, J. S. (2005). Cancer and the family: An integrative model. Cancer, 104(S11), 2584-2595. doi:10.1002/cncr.21489
22. Smerecnik, C. M. R., Mesters, I., Verweij, E., deVries, N. K., & deVries, H. (2009). A systematic review of the impact of genetic counseling on risk perception accuracy. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18, 217-228. doi:10.1007/s10897-008-9210-z
23. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedure and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
24. Warner, E., Foulkes, W., Goodwin, P., Meschino, W., Blondal, J., Paterson, C.,...Narol, S. (1999). Prevalence and penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in unselected Ashkenazi Jewish women with breast cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 91(14), 1241-1247. doi:10.1093/jnci/91.14.1241