Dataset Information

Women's views on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To elicit women's responses to information about the nature and extent of overdiagnosis in mammography screening (detecting disease that would not present clinically during the woman's lifetime) and explore how awareness of overdiagnosis might influence attitudes and intentions about screening.

Design

Qualitative study using focus groups that included a presentation explaining overdiagnosis, incorporating different published estimates of its rate (1-10%, 30%, 50%) and information on the mortality benefit of screening, with guided group discussions

Setting

Sydney, Australia

Participants

Fifty women aged 40-79 years with no personal history of breast cancer and with varying levels of education and participation in screening.

Results

Prior awareness of breast cancer overdiagnosis was minimal. Women generally reacted with surprise, but most came to understand the issue. Responses to overdiagnosis and the different estimates of its magnitude were diverse. The highest estimate (50%) made some women perceive a need for more careful personal decision making about screening. In contrast, the lower and intermediate estimates (1-10% and 30%) had limited impact on attitudes and intentions, with many women remaining committed to screening. For some women, the information raised concerns, not about whether to screen but whether to treat a screen detected cancer or consider alternative approaches (such as watchful waiting). Information preferences varied: many women considered it important to take overdiagnosis into account and make informed choices about whether to have screening, but many wanted to be encouraged to be screened.

Conclusions

Women from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds could comprehend the issue of overdiagnosis in mammography screening, and they generally valued information about it. Effects on screening intentions may depend heavily on the rate of overdiagnosis. Overdiagnosis will be new and counterintuitive for many people and may influence screening and treatment decisions in unintended ways, underscoring the need for careful communication.

SUBMITTER: Hersch J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3552499 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate conceptual knowledge about mammographic screening among Norwegian women.DesignWe administered a cross-sectional, web-based survey. We used multiple-choice questions and a grading rubric published by a research group from Australia.SettingOur Norwegian-language survey was open from April to June 2020 and targeted women aged 45-74 years.Participants2033 women completed our questionnaire. We excluded 13 women outside the target age range and 128 women with incomplete data. Responses from 1892 women were included in the final study sample.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe questionnaire focused on women's knowledge about the breast cancer mortality reduction, false positive results and overdiagnosis associated with mammographic screening. The primary outcome was the mean number of marks assigned in each of the three themes and overall. There were three potential marks for questions about breast cancer mortality, one for false positives and six for overdiagnosis.ResultsMost women (91.7%) correctly reported that screened women are less likely to die of breast cancer than non-screened women. 39.7% of women reported having heard of a 'false positive screening result' and 86.2% identified the term's definition; 51.3% of women had heard of 'overdiagnosis' and 14.8% identified the term's definition. The mean score was 2.59 of 3 for questions about breast cancer mortality benefit and 0.93 of 1 for the question about false positive screening results. It was 2.23 of 6 for questions about overdiagnosis.ConclusionsMost participants correctly answered questions about the breast cancer mortality benefit and false positive results associated with screening. The proportion of correct responses to questions about overdiagnosis was modest, indicating that conceptual knowledge about overdiagnosis was lower. Qualitative studies that can obtain in-depth information about women's understanding of overdiagnosis may help improve Norwegian-language information about this challenging topic.

Project description:ObjectivePromotional media coverage of early detection tests is an important driver of overdiagnosis. Following research evidence that global media coverage presents the benefits of testing healthy people far more frequently than harms, and gives little coverage to overdiagnosis, we sought to examine journalists' views on media reporting of tests, overdiagnosis, and strategies to improve critical reporting on tests.DesignQualitative study using semistructured telephone interviews. Interviews were conducted between February and March 2020 and were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. Framework thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.Participants and settingTwenty-two journalists (mainly specialising in health reporting, average 14.5 years' experience) based in Australia.ResultsThis sample of journalists acknowledged the potential harms of medical tests but felt that knowledge of harms was low among journalists and the public at large. Most were aware of the term overdiagnosis, but commonly felt that it is challenging to both understand and communicate in light of strong beliefs in the benefits of early detection. Journalists felt that newsworthiness in the form of major public health impact was the key ingredient for stories about medical tests. The journalists acknowledged that factors, like the press release and 'click bait culture' in particular, can influence the framing of coverage about tests. Lack of knowledge and training, as well as time pressures, were perceived to be the main barriers to critical reporting on tests. Journalists felt that training and better access to information about potential harms would enable more critical reporting.ConclusionsEffectively communicating overdiagnosis is a challenge in light of common beliefs about the benefits of testing and the culture of current journalism practices. Providing journalists with training, support and better access to information about potential harms of tests could aid critical reporting of tests.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Developments in enzyme replacement therapy have kindled discussions on adding Pompe disease, characterized by progressive muscle weakness and wasting, to neonatal screening. Pompe disease does not fit traditional screening criteria as it is a broad-spectrum phenotype disorder that may occur in lethal form in early infancy or manifest in less severe forms from infancy to late adulthood. Current screening tests cannot differentiate between these forms. Normally, expanding screening is discussed among experts in advisory bodies. While advisory reports usually mention the procedures and outcome of deliberations, little is known of the importance attached to different arguments and the actual weighing processes involved. In this research we aim to explore the views of a wide range of relevant professionals to gain more insight into the process of weighing pros and cons of neonatal screening for Pompe disease, as an example of the dilemmas involved in screening for broad-spectrum phenotype disorders. METHODS: We conducted 24 semi-structured interviews with medical, lab, insurance and screening professionals, and executive staff of patient organisations. They were asked about their first reaction to neonatal screening for Pompe disease, after which benefits and harms and requirements for screening were explored in more detail. RESULTS: Advantages included health gain by timely intervention, avoiding a diagnostic quest, having a reproductive choice and gaining more knowledge about the natural course and treatment. Being prepared was mentioned as an advantage for the later manifesting cases. Disadvantages included treatment costs and uncertainties about its effect, the timing of treatment in later manifesting cases, the psychological burden for the patient-in-waiting and the family. Also the downsides of having prior knowledge as well as having to consider a reproductive option were mentioned as disadvantages. CONCLUSION: When weighing pros and cons, interviewees attach different importance to different arguments, based on personal and professional views. Professionals expect benefits from neonatal screening for Pompe disease, especially for early-onset cases. Some interviewees valued screening in later manifesting cases as well, while stressing the need for adequate support of pre-symptomatic patients and their families. Others considered the psychological burden and uncertainties regarding treatment as reasons not to screen.

Project description:BackgroundUniversal screening for postnatal depression is currently being promoted in Australia to assist detection and treatment of affected women, yet debate continues internationally about the effectiveness of screening. One rural shire in Victoria has been screening all women for postnatal depression at maternal and child health checks for many years. This paper explores the views of women affected by this intervention.MethodsA postal survey was sent to an entire one year cohort of women resident in the shire and eligible for this program [n = 230]. Women were asked whether they recalled having been screened for postnatal depression and what their experience had been, including any referrals made as a result of screening. Women interested in providing additional information were invited to give a phone number for further contact. Twenty women were interviewed in-depth about their experiences. The interview sample was selected to include both depressed and non-depressed women living in town and on rural properties, who represented the range of circumstances of women living in the shire.ResultsThe return rate for the postal survey was 62% [n = 147/230]. Eighty-seven women indicated that they were interested in further contact, 80 of whom were able to be reached by telephone and 20 were interviewed in-depth. Women had diverse views and experiences of screening. The EPDS proved to be a barrier for some women, and a facilitator for others, in accessing support and referrals. The mediating factor appeared to be a trusting relationship with the nurse able to communicate her concern for the woman and offer support and referrals if required.ConclusionsDetection of maternal depression requires more than administration of a screening tool at a single time point. While this approach did work for some women, for others it actually made appropriate care and support more difficult. Rather, trained and empathic healthcare providers working in a coordinated primary care service should provide multiple and flexible opportunities for women to disclose and discuss their emotional health issues.