Breast Cancer Risk Perception and Mammography Screening Behavior of Women in Northeast Brazil

• Main Authors: Saionara A?ucena Vieira Alves (Author), Mathias Weller (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Mary Ann Liebert, 2020-06-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.1089/WHR.2019.0026; 2688-4844
• Keywords: breast cancer; perceived risk; mammography screening behavior; Gynecology and obstetrics; RG1-991; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: Women's Health Reports, Vol 1, Iss 1, Pp 150-158 (2020)

Background: Previous studies suggest that education and income affect Brazilian women's breast cancer prevention behavior. The present study focused on the impact of perceived and estimated risk on mammography screening (MS) behavior. Materials and Methods: Information regarding socioeconomic variables and risk perception was obtained from 396 healthy women aged 40?79 years. Perceived comparative risk was measured on a seven-point Likert scale. A Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool of 5-year risk to develop breast cancer was used to determine objective risk. Estimated comparative risk was determined as categories of perceived risk relative to the objective risk. Regression analysis was applied to determine odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (95% CIs) of variables. Results: Asked about the potential of MS to lower risk of death because of breast cancer, 215 (54.29%) responded that it does not lower risk. Women with low perceived comparative risk had a twofold (OR?=?0.493; 95% CI: 0.24?1.00) decreased chance to participate in MS annually, compared with women with high-perceived comparative risk (p?=?0.020). Women without family history had a 7.6-fold (OR?=?0.132; 95% CI: 0.07?0.25) decreased chance of having a high-perceived comparative risk (p?=?0.000). If compared with underestimation, the overestimation and accurate estimation of comparative risk tended to be associated with a decreased chance of MS attendance (p?=?0.017). Regression modeling indicated that low educational level, no occupation, and no family history decreased the chance of women having MS (p?=?0.040; p?=?0.010; p?=?0.022). Conclusions: Risk perception depended on family history. Present data did not indicate that overestimation, or accurate estimation of comparative risk, increased chance of MS attendance. Educational level, occupation status, and family history, instead, determined MS performance.